Nintendo Switch 2 - For the Soytendo consoomers to speculate about the successor to the Switch, recently announced for 2025.

  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
wtfNeedSignUp said:
Made me think that Fire Emblem Blacked will have an open world rather than a linear questline, but that could actually be good change.
Click to expand...
From the looks of things, it's halfway at that point. But that one clip just looks like your generic hub level
 
Kiwifarmsname said:
I honestly think the Switch 2 is an improvement. Just not enough of an improvement.
Click to expand...
The pricing of games and accessories isn't really helping. It kind of puts a dampen on all the good parts of the console.

73_Autistic_Fuck_54 said:
Hell yeah Wario World (should have been available from the start imo)
https://youtu.be/cSHNjjElNpw
Click to expand...
That wasn't part of the line-up they showed at the reveal IIRC. Hopefully this means we'll get some other random games like the two Monkey Balls.
 
Switch 2 is priced like a premium product but it doesn't have premium features. No VRR, no HDMI 2.1, no 8k output (4k 120fps), still only 5.1 surround only (we've been stuck here since the GameCube), still no magnetic sticks, the worst LCD they could possibly find for the screen, paid game updates to use your new hardware, paywalled button on the controller, game prices raised, the fake carts with no game on them, only supporting the expensive express micro SD that nobody except Nintendo uses, hostile anti-repair designs (glue, layered boards, hidden screws).
 
Fox Girl Enjoyer said:
Most people have complained about the empty desert you dolt. Hell, the fucking desert has "shrines" where you get expansion. The BOTW-fication is absolutely applicable here.
Maybe you need to be watching streams of the game instead.
Click to expand...
The post I replied to referred to it as an open world and compare it to BotW. The desert is a hub and each area is definitely not open. The ONLY similarity is that shrines exist in the hub. And unlike you and the other poster, I’m actually playing through it currently and know what I’m talking about.

Also, about 80% or greater of Nintendo’s output in the last 10 years is not open world. You guys need to take a breath and calm down lol. Nintendo’s not making everything a BotW open world.
 
Großmann said:
The post I replied to referred to it as an open world and compare it to BotW. The desert is a hub and each area is definitely not open. The ONLY similarity is that shrines exist in the hub. And unlike you and the other poster, I’m actually playing through it currently and know what I’m talking about.

Also, about 80% or greater of Nintendo’s output in the last 10 years is not open world. You guys need to take a breath and calm down lol. Nintendo’s not making everything a BotW open world.
Click to expand...
Why do you think they added a massive open area to a game that is normally corridors? Its not like it was something they really really wanted to do but could realize on the Gamecube/Wii. It's obvious Nintendo wanted a big open area LIKE an open world because they think it will make the game sell better. I don't think Retro pitched picking up green crystals and Nintendo jumped over the table to give them money.

Yes, it's not exactly the same as BOTW's open world. But that doesn't mean it's not tacked on and wasn't done because "it worked for Zelda". You're just missing the point.
 
NerdShamer said:
It happened to Mario. Happened to Zelda, twice in a row. Happened to DK. This Metroid did it as an empty hub area with extremely linear levels. Happened to Sonic. Happened to Mario Kart. Almost happened to Kirby...
Click to expand...
It didn’t happen to Mario. Odyssey’s levels were designed like a cross between SM64 and Banjo-Kazooie. Large and non-linear, but not connected together in an open world space. Bowser’s Fury is as close to open world* as it got for Mario in the last 10 years (open world as in all the levels exist in one space, but you linearly progress through that world and are gated by the number of collected stars).

We’re talking about BotW open worlds, so of course Zelda is currently open world. The series was naturally going to progress to this point anyway. And honestly, I’m surprised you didn’t mention Pokemon, but again, Pokemon was naturally going to reach this point anyway.

It didn’t happen with DK. Bananza’s design is the same as Mario Odyssey in that the levels are large, but designed to be moved through a certain way and not a part of a larger open space.

Metroid Prime 4’s Sol Valley is a hub world through and through. If we are calling hub worlds open worlds then I guess many 3D platformers and shooters from the 90s are open world too.

Sonic isn’t Nintendo and Kirby hasn’t done open world, so I don’t know what you’re talking about there.

Fox Girl Enjoyer said:
Why do you think they added a massive open area to a game that is normally corridors? Its not like it was something they really really wanted to do but could realize on the Gamecube/Wii. It's obvious Nintendo wanted a big open area LIKE an open world because they think it will make the game sell better. I don't think Retro pitched picking up green crystals and Nintendo jumped over the table to give them money.

Yes, it's not exactly the same as BOTW's open world. But that doesn't mean it's not tacked on and wasn't done because "it worked for Zelda". You're just missing the point.
Click to expand...
My thoughts on why Sol Valley exists is to make the space between levels feel more natural so you don’t have the weird juxtaposition of a stormy place next to a calm and serene forest next to basically Siberia, next to an active volcano. You’re reaching too hard to make this some nefarious plot to ruin your favorite games by making it BotW. I’m am definitely not saying it was executed well, but you don’t have to say it’s something it isn’t to hate it.
 
Großmann said:
The post I replied to referred to it as an open world and compare it to BotW. The desert is a hub and each area is definitely not open. The ONLY similarity is that shrines exist in the hub. And unlike you and the other poster, I’m actually playing through it currently and know what I’m talking about.

Also, about 80% or greater of Nintendo’s output in the last 10 years is not open world. You guys need to take a breath and calm down lol. Nintendo’s not making everything a BotW open world.
Click to expand...
A tacked on “hub area” still counts as BOTW-ification (see MK World as another example of this trend). Being charitable, DK is in-line as an Odyssey sequel. TOTK (along with Aonuma’s comments) show that the traditional Zelda formula is dead with Echoes being the closest they’re willing to return moving forward. Last 10 years is an irrelevant timeframe, you have to look at after BOTW (2017) with a buffer for the mandate to go through (perhaps ~2020 onwards). In that time frame, the BOTW-ification is noticeable albeit not overwhelming, moving forward in the Switch 2’s lifecycle we’ll have to see if it ends up manifesting or disappears as a fluke of happenstance.


Großmann said:
Pokemon
Click to expand...
One could make an argument for Pokémon, but the current game is moreso inline with Gamefreak’s traditional course of overselling an idea followed by performing worse than even the lowest expectations out of sheer laziness.
 
When I hear breath of the wild-ification I don't think open world, I think 'open air' where the player has no limitations in what they can do, letting them go anywhere at any time with no limitations, which is what Zelda Echoes is like, same with Odyssey (though more structured), Mario Kart, and Donkey Kong. Nintendo is trying to make everything into a giant sandbox with little structure. Of course this obviously doesn't apply to Prime 4 as that game is as linear if not more linear than Other M, the empty desert exists to save development time and bloat playtime to hide how short and empty the game actually is.

A proper Metroid game would have connecting areas between major areas, like Magmoor in Prime 1 or the Temple Grounds in Prime 2, but that would require actual metroidvania design and areas with multiple paths and overlapping connections and multiple ways in and out of an area, none of which Prime 4 has in any way, so they stuck the single load zones in an empty world to fill time as you travel between them instead of actual level navigation you would find in a Metroid game.
 
Last edited:
Jarch6 said:
A tacked on “hub area” still counts as BOTW-ification (see MK World as another example of this trend)
Click to expand...
It doesn’t. It’s a hub world. Metroid Prime 1 and 2 also had hub worlds, but smaller scale. MKW was indeed open world though if you choose to disregard that it only matters when you play free roam.

Jarch6 said:
Last 10 years is an irrelevant timeframe, you have to look at after BOTW (2017) with a buffer for the mandate to go through (perhaps ~2020 onwards)
Click to expand...
I said 10 years because it’s the rough time that’s elapsed since BotW’s release. Even zooming into only the last 5 years, the argument that Nintendo is making everything like BotW fails when you examine their overall output. The only game series that tried open world in that time were Pokemon and Mario Kart. Zelda was already open world at that point and Xenoblade X came out over 10 years ago. Am I missing anything else?

Soggy Floppa said:
When I hear breath of the wild-ification I don't think open world, I think 'open air' where the player has no limitations in what they can do,
Click to expand...
I think this is a better argument to make about Nintendo’s direction, but it still doesn’t quite hold up to scrutiny when you look at Nintendo’s output at scale. And for the games that have gone that way, I don’t see it as a negative change. The implementation from game to game doesn’t always work completely, but more choices on how to interact with a game is always good.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom