Legend of Zelda thread - Lorefags GTFO!

[Creep3r]

All I want is more enemy variety than just bokoblin, moblin and lizalfo camps everywhere in such a huge overworld. Even in TP they had a truck load of lizalfos variants alone with unique looks and gimmicks.

 

[Mega Black]

Boy i sure love just walking around on a empty wasteland collecting shit, doing the same boring ass """"dungeons"""" while my paper equipment breaks every 3 seconds
BOTW was dogshit and seeing as how BOTW 2 is shaping up to be breath of the shart x skyward bore i have no hopes for it

"And lo they spurned Christ, for he told them the truth."

Honestly Breath was so close to being good, it just needed some tweaking and actual dungeons. Remove the paraglider, make navigating the environment more of a proper puzzle, add some real fucking depth to the combat, and give us some big ass dungeons to explore. As it is now, it's an Ubisoft tier open world with pretty visuals and good character design.

Empty wasteland? Not terribly varied? It's like you didn't even play BOTW.

The overworld is pretty empty, there's not much to discover. The biomes are varied but they're fairly standard, particularly for a Zelda game. My personal favorite area was the tropical jungle, because we haven't seen much of that in Zelda and it felt more unique. I've seen Death Mountain, I've seen Zora's Domain, I've seen deserts. They're all different but carry a feeling of 'been there done that'.

 

[Dammit Mandrake!]

"And lo they spurned Christ, for he told them the truth."

Honestly Breath was so close to being good, it just needed some tweaking and actual dungeons. Remove the paraglider, make navigating the environment more of a proper puzzle, add some real fucking depth to the combat, and give us some big ass dungeons to explore. As it is now, it's an Ubisoft tier open world with pretty visuals and good character design.

The overworld is pretty empty, there's not much to discover. The biomes are varied but they're fairly standard, particularly for a Zelda game. My personal favorite area was the tropical jungle, because we haven't seen much of that in Zelda and it felt more unique. I've seen Death Mountain, I've seen Zora's Domain, I've seen deserts. They're all different but carry a feeling of 'been there done that'.

This guy would die if he were left in a room without instructions on how to get out.

 

[NerdShamer]

The overworld is pretty empty, there's not much to discover

Well, it doesn't really help much that the only things to discover are another monster camp, an Shrine that you're already looking for, some loot that you really don't need, or the occasional hermit that might be related to an quest.

Plus, the towns all exists within an vacuum and they really don't offer much, aside from the ninja suit.

 

[Mega Black]

This guy would die if he were left in a room without instructions on how to get out.

Lock me in a room with Nintendo fans and you wouldn't have to worry, I'd hang myself from the ceiling fan to escape.

Well, it doesn't really help much that the only things to discover are another monster camp, an Shrine that you're already looking for, some loot that you really don't need, or the occasional hermit that might be related to an quest.

Plus, the towns all exists within an vacuum and they really don't offer much, aside from the ninja suit.

The hermits at least provide some kind of unique interaction. Shrines are really the major culprit, I think, they became the solution/reward for every interaction you can have with the open world and they stop being special after the tenth. It's why I'm hoping Breath of the Wild 2 spices things up with some actual underground exploration, or some dungeons, or something to make the corners of the world fun to poke around in.

 

[Dammit Mandrake!]

aside from the ninja suit.

I don't think I ever used that once.

 

[Milwaukee Macho Man]

I don't think I ever used that once.

Where was "extra stealth" even needed? Even in the Yuga dungeon it was't really needed.

 

[Dammit Mandrake!]

Where was "extra stealth" even needed? Even in the Yuga dungeon it was't really needed.

Yeah and if you were a baller-ass nigger like me you just fought some of the more in-the-way the guards and didn't get one-shotted by them.

I enjoyed wandering around Hyrule and looking at shit. Some more enemy variety would have been nice and I also would have liked some real dungeons. But it was still an excellent game despite that. Plus I could wander around and look at shit. It's really hard to find open world games where you can wander around and look at shit in any meaningful fashion.

 

[SSj_Ness (Yiffed)]

Walk across Hyrule Field as an adult in OOT. Walk across Dark World in LTTP. How many enemies do you fight in each?

I'm not saying it's 1:1 with exactly the same number of enemies. That goes beyond splitting hairs, imo. And I think a lot of things you mention fall into that category, like jumping being in OoT.

I mean, OoT is a "sequel" which means adding and improving things. Furthermore, it is also inherently different due to its nature of being 3D. But can you imagine a more faithful 3D Zelda? I can't. It felt like LttP2 but in 3D.

They're very different games. They're in the same series and share many plot elements and themes and the basic conceit of enter dungeon, collet item, make progress, (which BOTW also has, but broken down across shrines as opposed to larger dungeons) but from a gameplay perspective they are completely different.

I just think you're exaggerating by saying they're "completely different". Look at their water temples for example, they have similar ideas just executed differently due to technology. Swimming in 3D space to solve puzzles is something LttP couldn't do, so yeah I guess they're "completely different" in that very strict, technical sense, but the design philosophy is extremely similar.

IMO, it's like comparing Mario World to Mario 64. Like, yeah, Bowser kidnapped the princess, you go into levels, jump around and kill goombas, collect power ups, coins and 1-ups and then have a showdown with Bowser at the end, but they're totally different experiences.

The differences between SMW & SM64 and LttP & OoT are incomparable. They couldn't or didn't want to translate Mario's "reach the goal" gameplay to 3D, so they made it extremely exploration heavy. It took what was a very, very minor (and largely optional) element of previous Mario games and made that the bulk of the game. Platforming was still integral but it was just a means for exploration in each world, there were no ends of stages.

OoT on the other hand is as close to LttP as possible. Your goals gameplay wise are identical, it's just translated to 3D. You're still exploring and fighting and solving puzzles in roughly the same ways and with a similar balance between these elements.

Yeah there's more tutorials and cinematics and new stuff like fishing mechanics, stealth segments, etc, but that's just the nature of being a sequel, adding shit on top of what exists. They're all rather minor too.

Just something simple like having the ability to jump small gaps from the outset radically changed gameplay in OOT vs LTTP. You couldn't traverse a gap a single tile wide without an item in Zelda before then.

I mean, you couldn't run without an item in LttP either, and in OoT there's no sword beam in the final game. Neither of those minor differences is significant enough, even with dozens of them adding up, to deem the games "completely different".

I'm not denying differences exist, I'm just arguing that most are necessary, expected, and don't detract from what LttP established in any meaningful way.

There were Zelda purists on Usenet in the 1990s who thought OOT was dogshit because it changed so much established stuff in the series, the same way you view BOTW now.

I'm not even a purist though. I think Zelda 1 & 2 are archaic dogshit by modern standards (I respect them for their historical value). If anything a true Zelda purist would probably enjoy BotW more than any other game in the series.

I'm just a fan of what LttP clearly established for the series. It improved on LoZ, streamlined the experience, and set the standards for each element moving forward. Just adding a jump mechanic, 3D movement, tutorials etc doesn't change that.

We're just returning to the "wandering around aimlessly without much story is fun" of LoZ. It's pure regression.

I think looking back decades after the fact and in light of BOTW it's harder to see how different the 2D and early 3D games are, but Zelda 64 was viewed as a radical reinvention of the series at the time it was released.

I think of it as a clever translation rather than a radical reinvention, but to each his own.

I think if you went back in time to 1998, stripped easily identifiable elements like characters from the older games and the Master Sword out of Zelda 64 and released it pretty much as is besides that, nobody would have recognized it as Zelda. They didn't just jump to 3D, they totally rebuilt the gameplay mechanics.

Yes, by necessity. The jump to 3D was a necessity and very difficult, not every series made it well. Some were brilliant adaptations like Metal Gear, others were still good games but also clearly very different such as Donkey Kong, while others fell flat like Earthworm Jim, being neither good adaptations of the series or even good games in their own right.

If you were to categorize OoT it would be much more in the Metal Gear camp. Both OoT & MGS are recognizable evolutions of their series. Remember, it's not to say there are no differences, there literally have to be differences. It's where and how you make them that matters.

Compare it to say, Brave Fencer Musashi which was very clearly inspired by Zelda, and much closer to a 3D version of pre-OOT Zelda mechanically.

I can't comment on BFM, I haven't played it at all (maybe a demo, I don't remember). I'll have to check that out though, that's a very interesting description.

*Edit* All this isn't to say OOT and LTTP have nothing in common. I just really think you're overstating a bunch of mostly superficial similarities that amount to the Zelda equivalent of "Bowser has captured Princes Toadstool" and kind of doing a disservice to OOT and Wind Waker in order to sustain the narrative of "They changed muh Zelda! How could they do this? They haven't changed it in 30 years!"

It just seems like we're looking at the same things and coming to different conclusions. From my perspective those "superficial similarities" are the identity Zelda has largely stuck with since LttP.

And of course they changed Zelda in some ways over time. I think the two most similar games are OoT and WW, which is why I like them the most out of any 3D Zelda games.

For example, adding Wolf Link didn't really change TP much. At its core it's very similar to what came before. It just sucked because of other things I didn't appreciate, like the art style and music. Mechanically, it's very familiar and on paper I should like it, but it's just okay. I think playing the Wii version soured me on it a bit too. If it hits Switch without motion controls I'll give it another shot.

Anyway, my point is they haven't changed much. The formula is largely the same, you play LttP, OoT, WW, Minish Cap, and guess what? Unsurprisingly, they're all very similar. BotW feels like nothing else in the series except LoZ, which was probably mind blowing in the 80's, but is mind numbing now.

 

[Dom Cruise]

It's really bizarre to me how divisive BOTW is tbh.

Can everyone at least agree that just focusing on games of the 2010s it's a significant step above the vast majority of non-indie published titles from that decade?

All I want is more enemy variety than just bokoblin, moblin and lizalfo camps everywhere in such a huge overworld. Even in TP they had a truck load of lizalfos variants alone with unique looks and gimmicks.

It could have used some Poes and Redeads for variety.

The overworld is pretty empty, there's not much to discover. The biomes are varied but they're fairly standard, particularly for a Zelda game. My personal favorite area was the tropical jungle, because we haven't seen much of that in Zelda and it felt more unique. I've seen Death Mountain, I've seen Zora's Domain, I've seen deserts. They're all different but carry a feeling of 'been there done that'.

We've seen Death Mountain, Zora's Domain and deserts, but not in an open world Zelda before, which makes it all cool and fresh again.

Why wouldn't the first open world Zelda stick with the primary themes of Hyrule? If anything it needed more classic locales, while the post apocalyptic theme was cool, I found myself missing when Hyrule castle town and Lon Lon Ranch weren't abandoned ruins.

Well, it doesn't really help much that the only things to discover are another monster camp, an Shrine that you're already looking for, some loot that you really don't need, or the occasional hermit that might be related to an quest.

Plus, the towns all exists within an vacuum and they really don't offer much, aside from the ninja suit.

The towns could have used a little more to them, it's true.

Yeah and if you were a baller-ass nigger like me you just fought some of the more in-the-way the guards and didn't get one-shotted by them.

I enjoyed wandering around Hyrule and looking at shit. Some more enemy variety would have been nice and I also would have liked some real dungeons. But it was still an excellent game despite that. Plus I could wander around and look at shit. It's really hard to find open world games where you can wander around and look at shit in any meaningful fashion.

View attachment 3180189

The "looking at shit" factor is so lost on people, so many people can't just appreciate being able to look at cool shit in a video game and it always has to be a steady stream of specific game mechanics, sometimes it's good to just stop and smell the roses and BOTW delivered that better than most other games.

But I think there's a big divide with the way people think about Zelda, for some the core is the overworld, for others it's the dungeons, for me my main interest has always been exploring the overworld, not the dungeon crawls, BOTW was like my dream Zelda game in a way.

Like when I think about Wind Waker the first thing that springs to mind is how fun it was exploring the ocean, the dungeons were well done in that game, but by far my favorite thing was the ocean exploration.

And like BOTW, the ocean in WW is something a lot of people disliked, but I always fucking loved it.

If anything I worry that BOTW2 will be an overcorrection and listen too hard to the "no dungeons!" whiners and leave me cold by not having as interesting an overworld to explore.

For whatever reason Zelda is a series that really inspires a love it or hate it reaction from people, it's kind of odd really.

 

[SSj_Ness (Yiffed)]

Empty wasteland? Not terribly varied? It's like you didn't even play BOTW.

How can you say it's not terribly varied when the desert area is hugely different, as is the area around death mountain and the jungle type area?

What is there to do in its world? Don't say explore, seeds, or consumable items. I don't need another frail weapon or to fight more goblins, and I'm not exploring for no reason.

Very early on there's an icy area. What's in there? Same as everywhere else, nothing. Except now you need berries to keep you warm so you can see the nothing that's in there without freezing to death first.

Shrines are gay, lazy, boring. That's the most interesting thing you can find no matter where you go. The variety is illusionary, almost entirely aesthetic differences only. In Skyrim, if I go to one of the major cities it is significantly different and packed with shit to do.

If I go to Riften there's scumbags everywhere and scumbag things to do, like join the Thieves Guild. Far different than if I go to Markarth and get caught up in a twisting mystery involving the Forsworn. Along the way between these different places I might fight a dragon, be attacked by the Dark Brotherhood's assassins, kill guards and free a prisoner, murder a dude for no good reason, or find a stray dog and have him join my quest.

But I guess I can't find any seeds or breakable swords, so yeah, BotW > Skyrim.

Seriously though, it just feels like BotW is empty. I played an all nighter, was kinda into it but just had no reason to ever boot it back up. It's interesting but not fun, it feels legitimately incomplete.

 

[NerdShamer]

It's really bizarre to me how divisive BOTW is tbh.

For some reason, I keep forgetting why I made this thread; but yesterday's arguing just reminded me. But considering what goes on in the original Nintendo thread, I can't really say that this containment thread is working. Although it is an great source of entertainment.

 

[Dom Cruise]

What is there to do in its world? Don't say explore, seeds, or consumable items. I don't need another frail weapon or to fight more goblins, and I'm not exploring for no reason.

Very early on there's an icy area. What's in there? Same as everywhere else, nothing. Except now you need berries to keep you warm so you can see the nothing that's in there without freezing to death first.

Shrines are gay, lazy, boring. That's the most interesting thing you can find no matter where you go. The variety is illusionary, almost entirely aesthetic differences only. In Skyrim, if I go to one of the major cities it is significantly different and packed with shit to do.

If I go to Riften there's scumbags everywhere and scumbag things to do, like join the Thieves Guild. Far different than if I go to Markarth and get caught up in a twisting mystery involving the Forsworn. Along the way between these different places I might fight a dragon, be attacked by the Dark Brotherhood's assassins, kill guards and free a prisoner, murder a dude for no good reason, or find a stray dog and have him join my quest.

But I guess I can't find any seeds or breakable swords, so yeah, BotW > Skyrim.

Seriously though, it just feels like BotW is empty. I played an all nighter, was kinda into it but just had no reason to ever boot it back up. It's interesting but not fun, it feels legitimately incomplete.
Click to expand...

Sometimes the joy of exploration is it's own reward, you don't need anything specific to find or do so long as there's nice stuff to look at.

Most people are going to be way, way more literal minded and not get that though, like you.

I mean Skyrim's a good game yeah, but Elder Scrolls and Zelda are two very different things, this is kind of apples and oranges, Skyrim's world outside the cities also feels more copy paste whereas BOTW feels more hand crafted to me, you talk about the repetition of shrines, but how many dungeons in Skyrim looked the same and boiled down to "walk from point A to point B and kill some things (usually Drauger) along the way"? at least the shrines often had puzzles to figure out.

 

[Milwaukee Macho Man]

Can everyone at least agree that just focusing on games of the 2010s it's a significant step above the vast majority of non-indie published titles from that decade?

Absolutely fucking not. It doesn't even do things better than most Ubisoft titles.

Sometimes the joy of exploration is it's own reward, you don't need anything specific to find or do so long as there's nice stuff to look at.

Dom, I don't need to pay 60 dollars to go look at things. I can go outside. I can go to a park. I can go to a nature preserve. I can go to a city.

I can literally fucking go anywhere and look at stuff. And if I don't want to leave the house, I would be much better off just buying a VR headset for this sort of thing.

I get that this can be enjoyable to some people, but as a grown ass 32 year old I have better uses of my time than just walk around and look at stuff in a video game.

 

[Dom Cruise]

Absolutely fucking not.

How? How is it not better than all those Assassin's Creeds, Cawwadootys and Forkknife?

Name the 2010s games you think are way better than BOTW.

 

[Creep3r]

It could have used some Poes and Redeads for variety.

Its also the only non-handheld 3D game in the series to not feature Deku Babas (those carnivorous plant things).

There were also so many opportunities for unique enemies in that hebra/frozen region in the game, even some yeti/yook settlements to boot, yet its so barren.

 

[Milwaukee Macho Man]

How? How is it not better than all those Assassin's Creeds, Cawwadootys and Forkknife?

Name the 2010s games you think are way better than BOTW.

Skyrim
Fallout New Vegas
Fallout 4
Ghosts of Tsushima
God of War
Assassins Creed IV: Black Flag
Far Cry 3, 4, 5 and 6
Super Mario Odyssey
Hitman and Hitman 2 (didn't play 3)
Middle Earth: Shadow of Mordor
Middle Earth: Shadow of War
Batman: Arkham City
Batman: Arkham Origins
Modern Warfare Reboot

And as much as it pains me to say it

Ghost Recon: Wildlands
Metal Gear Solid V: The Phantom Pain

and that's just off the top of my head.

Funny enough, for all your Ubisoft hate, I've heard from people that Immortals: Fenyx Rising is better than Breath of the Wild. I haven't played it though.

Edit: How could I fuckin forget Metroid Dread

 

[SSj_Ness (Yiffed)]

Can everyone at least agree that just focusing on games of the 2010s it's a significant step above the vast majority of non-indie published titles from that decade?

I'd like to be agreeable, but dude, BotW wasn't even the best Nintendo game of just 2017 specifically, even if Wii U & 3DS are excluded (so Switch only); Super Mario Odyssey was.

My highest praise for BotW is it's better than churned out annual franchises such as CoD, and even more overrated junk like TLoU. At least there's potential in BotW.

Sometimes the joy of exploration is it's own reward, you don't need anything specific to find or do so long as there's nice stuff to look at.

Most people are going to be way, way more literal minded and not get that though, like you.

I mean, that's fine but not for long. Idk how anyone can get much more than a weekend out of it. Seems like a decent rental, not something you'd regret at all, but nothing to play further either.

I mean Skyrim's a good game yeah, but Elder Scrolls and Zelda are two very different things, this is kind of apples and oranges, Skyrim's world outside the cities also feels more copy paste whereas BOTW feels more hand crafted to me, you talk about the repetition of shrines, but how many dungeons in Skyrim looked the same and boiled down to "walk from point A to point B and kill some things (usually Drauger) along the way"? at least the shrines often had puzzles to figure out.

Skyrim is significantly older, a last gen game, and still does the open world thing better imo. It looks more organic, stumbling upon cool things or places or people feels better and happens way more.

But yeah, the dungeons in Skyrim have aged awfully. Still, just a few of those are required, most of the fun stuff happens outside of them. It's not a perfect game but it does a lot of stuff better than BotW despite being older.

Remember though, Skyrim is also a much more complicated game with more systems and factions and stuff. If it can have as much stuff going on as it does, being old as it is, why is BotW's world so empty in comparison?

That really needs to be accepted. BotW is barren. Maybe people can still enjoy that, okay. But Fallout 3's literal nuclear apocalypse world had more to see and do, and that game is growing ancient.

Will you still defend BotW2 if it turns out to be just as empty as BotW1 but now with a barren sky area? At some point you have to expect more from Nintendo if they're staying open world.

 

[NerdShamer]

Will you still defend BotW2 if it turns out to be just as empty as BotW1 but now with a barren sky area?

I'm pretty sure that everyone involved will still get triggered by Link touching grass in the sequel, at this point.

 

[Milwaukee Macho Man]

My real problem with Breath of the Wild is it just feels half baked. Almost like a tech demo.

It needed a better weapon/inventory system
It needed more variety of enemies
It needed *real* dungeons.

And here's the *biggest* one

It needed to ditch the Shrines.

They honestly feel super lazy. Heart Pieces and Stamina Vessels should have been items you find in the overworld. They could have still had a few shrines for more complicated puzzles, I guess, but collecting heart pieces and stamina vessels would have been way more of a reason to explore than just "looking at things" or collecting seeds to carry more shit for the dumbass inventory system.

It's why if Breath of the Wild 2 just becomes Breath of the Wild with Sky Shrines...yeesh that's going to be super bad.

But yeah, BotW suffers the same thing as MGS V for me. Just feels like a tech demo, a solid base but with nothing on it. Well MGSV, at least to me, felt really good to control and combat was kinda fun. But not enough that I've ever wanted to replay it before I found mods.

Edit: And here's the thing Dom. If you like the game, that's fine. If it's your favorite video game, that's fine too. But you should still be able to see it's shortcomings and understand why others might not feel that it was the greatest game of the 2010's