As good as this is, I'm worried that Nintendo is embracing cinematic game design a bit too much. There's too much non-gameplay cluttering the game, and to any gameplay enthusiast it's concerning.
As good as this is, I'm worried that Nintendo is embracing cinematic game design a bit too much.
these mfers are ANNOYINNG
I like to use muddle buds and watch them tear each other apart
I didn't have any since I barely explored unnderground
I love watching ai fight each other in video games
I like the boss bokos because I can just let loose with my stored up AoEs. I almost always use my muddles and dazzles here and just let the AI do the work for me. Brings me all the way back to AI fights in gmod.
The only thing I don't like about their design is that the big bokoblins look like the old designs for the moblins. But I think it's a great idea and it's a change up from only seeing enemy camps.
>2h weapons
Yes, I agree
Just deploy a combat drone and watch
There's like 45 minutes of cinematics and at least 50 hours of gameplay. I hate moviegames as much as the next guy but I don't see a problem here. Well, Zelda's VA sucks so there's that I guess.
One problem the game has is that the game tries way too hard to put the story on a pedestal. The gameplay is immediately neutered because you HAVE to adhere to the plot. This wouldn't normally be a bad thing, like you expect this in a Mario game because there's no story and it doesn't advertise itself as open world. Zelda, however, basically advertised from the start that it would have no restrictions. You could skip the entire game and rush right to ganon. Was that not the selling point of BOTW? And yet look at all the restrictions that exist for no reason other than muh story.
>can't leave the great plateau until you do the tutorial exactly the way the game says
>can't kill npcs because you HAVE to be the hero
>pretend to torture the koroks all you want, they never actually die
>despite Zelda causing all of the problems in both games, she gets off without even a scolding because she's not allowed to learn an important lesson about not being a stuck up b***h
It's not really about the amount of cutscenes, but rather the concessions made to gut the gameplay, so the "story" makes sense.
Lets entertain your idiocy for a while
>>can't leave the great plateau until you do the tutorial exactly the way the game says
Because the game wants you to have and learn how to use all your tools so that you can actually explore and interact with the world. What is wrong with that, it serves a clear gameplay purpose.
>>can't kill NPCs because you HAVE to be the hero
Of course you mongoloid, zelda is a franchise of HEROIC fantasy for kids mu man. If you want to larp as an edgy killer, go play fable or skyrim or something else.
to torture the koroks all you want, they never actually die
Same as above
Zelda causing all of the problems in both games, she gets off without even a scolding because she's not allowed to learn an important lesson about not being a stuck up b***h
She learned her lesson BotW and rigthfully went on to tank calamity for a 100 years while link took his power nap. In totk she didn't even caused anything, Ganondorf was waking up on his own and she went to investigate because you can't have evil cum around the kingdom. From then on, she is a dragon overcharging the master sword. She is not the cause of anything that happened in the game.
You complains are idiotic and nitpicks at best. And believe me when i say you have enough material to critize both TotK and BotWs plots.
>Because the game wants you to have and learn how to use all your tools so that you can actually explore and interact with the world.
This is something the player should be allowed to naturally learn. I didn't need an hour long mandatory tutorial to learn how to dig blocks in Minecraft, or chop down trees in Terraria. even massively complex things can be learned through enough trial and error, and it is only a detriment to the game itself to railroad players through boring tutorials.
>Of course you mongoloid, zelda is a franchise of HEROIC fantasy for kids mu man.
Correction: OLDER Zelda is a franchise of heroic fantasy. BOTW and its sequel are supposed to toss all of that out to refresh the series and give it new life, hence the revamped approach to puzzles, open world design, and even the weapons you use. Why shouldn't the plot and story also be revamped?
>Same as above
Then why all the wacky tiktok webms of people torturing them? Seems like I'm not the only one who shares the sentiment of wanting them dead.
>She learned her lesson BotW and rigthfully went on to tank calamity for a 100 years
The plot says that, but she didn't do anything in the gameplay. Same in TOTK. She's no worse for wear in either game. She's supposedly gone through several thousand years of torture, and yet the game magically treats it like she was out for a day. She hasn't learned a damn thing, and will screw things up AGAIN in Zelda 3: How Ganon got his groove back. The player is the one actively fighting and killing monsters, and Link is the one who had to kill Ganon twice over regardless. If Zelda was supposedly helping, why didn't she kill Ganon herself? Where's all those hylian-blessed god powers? Did they magically disappear?
>or chop down trees in Terraria
because that is just a cutscene.
>This is something the player should be allowed to naturally learn
So just like in BotW and Totk? because the initial areas in both games teache naturally about all sorts of mechancis: Guardians, food, clothes, climate hazards, traverse terrains. Sure, you have the respective the respective shrine for each skill but once done with that, you are free to use them in any way you want. And again, in a game that roughly lasts 50 hours, having exactly 1 where you are slightly restricted is such a big deal.
>Why shouldn't the plot and story also be revamped?
While i do wish both games put a bit more effort into their narratives (like older games used to), what you are asking is irrational. Zelda is and will forever be a heroic fantasy franchise, the old formula was changed because they thought the open world design would allow a better sense of adventure but ultimately the core of the series remains intact.
>Korok
Same as above. And just because you hate something doesn't mean you should want it dead.
>why didn't she kill Ganon herself? Where's all those hylian-blessed god powers? Did they magically disappear?
Because she can't. Zelda is unable to defeat calimity on her own, hence why you are asked to go and save the other divine beats and get the master sword. As for her goddess powers... yes, totk is a poorly written game, i know. And again, she is not responsible for anything of what happened in TotK. Also funnily enough, she helps in both the fight against final calamity giving you the light arrows and in the fight against dragon dorf. And the funniest part is that the game literally allows you to ignore all of what i said and just go straight to the final boss. It makes no sense that you are complaining about.
>So just like in BotW and Totk?
Well, I can't skip the tutorials entirely, so no it's not like that at all. In Terraria I can go the whole game without ever seeing any more than maybe one dialogue box, and that's just from the old man in the dungeon since you have to fight him to let the moon lord spawn. Besides that, I'm not even faced with a "skip cutscene" or "skip dialogue" prompt, because they're never forced on you. Without even a tutorial, I can just explore and do as I please, and the game's progression is based around that. It is not a cinematic spectacle telling me what to do or how to feel, I can kill every NPC I see for all I care. The game isn't gonna wag its finger at me.
>Zelda is and will forever be a heroic fantasy franchise,
You're forgetting all the times Link was allowed to be an butthole. Like when he literally murdered Sakon the thief, or stole from a store and promptly got killed if he tried going back. Even Mario, the good hearted plumber, can quite literally kill baby penguins without the game sassing him for it. That's the benefit of a game not caring about its plot.
>and just because you hate something doesn't mean you should want it dead.
Why not?
>Because she can't.
Then she's useless. I don't recall Doomguy needing a 50 hour narrative and a princess to help him fight demons. He quite literally jumps into hell and starts beating up cyberdemons with his bare fists. Should nintendo not strive for that level of videogamey immersion? Granted Bethesda ruined it with their nu-Doom games with the epic cinematic spectacle, but I try to pretend that those don't exist.
>You don't want there to be any plot?
Correct.
>isn't that what TOTK is
Unskippable tutorial says otherwise.
hitting trees is an unskippable cutscene.
>>You don't want there to be any plot?
>Correct.
I don't think Zelda is or should be a franchise that has no plot. I strongly disagree with your vision of what Zelda should be. Zelda isn't just a puzzle game like you have in an iphone, like Soduku or something, and it's not a fighting game like street fighter and it's not a building game like minecraft. It's fundamentally an adventure game taking place in a mysterious land, it's not quite an RPG but it definitely has elements of that in it. That's what it always was. Even the original LOZ had a lot of plot that we just don't even notice because it's so fundamental to the franchise that it almost becomes invisible. The triforce, the princess, ganon, the fairies, death mountain, magical swords and shields, etc...These all were a part of an unfolding plot. If you want a story about an anonymous person running around aimlessly gluing things together and beating the shit out of goblins that might be interesting but it's not Zelda.
You are not going to get through to him. He literally cannot comprehend fiction as a concept.
>I don't think Zelda is or should be a franchise that has no plot.
About 7 years ago people didn't imagine Zelda to be anything other than OOT rehashes. They would've never guessed it to be an open world game with breakable weapons and skippable dungeons.It appears such a drastic change was for the better, according to the majority of fans. This means that everything should be put on the table.
>Zelda isn't sudoko, or Street Fighter or Minecraft
You're partially right. It's all of them combined, so it should take lessons from each. It doens't need to be a 1:1 clone, but if you're going to include an element from a series, you should adapt it for the better.
>If you want a story about an anonymous person running around aimlessly gluing things together and beating the shit out of goblins that might be interesting but it's not Zelda.
People already larp as that in TOTK. They make wacky penis fire robots that have flaming koroks attached to them. It appears the majority do indeed want to be an aimless person just beating things up without rhyme or reason.
Again see: Sakon the thief. Also you could technically attack NPCs like the gerudo in both OOT and MM. "but they were knocked out!" yeah by swinging a sword and firing arrows at them. A little violent to be considered "knocked out".
Go exclusively play Tetris and then have a nice day.
If the game is so good, then there would be no pushback against the trimming of fat from it.
no its excellent and i think removing the cinematics would harm it
Mario wouldn't be a worse game if you took out the voice acting and cutscenes. Why is it that Zelda would suffer?
Like the wood chopping cutscene in terraria
but what if i said it would be worse if you removed those elements?
Why?
Fat can't save low quality meat. Even the highest quality wagyu with top score marbling is gonna taste like trash if it's been soaking in dumpster juice.
What, in your mind, is considered a good story? You keep saying that I can't appreciate a good story, but what does that entail?
because i like it and i think it adds flavor and character, now what?
Well,I disagree, and I care more about gameplay than theatrics.
>One game made by an alternate developer,
and published by Nintendo, so they clearly had no problem with the content. Can you still Kill Sakon in the 3DS remake?
>Botw/totk has yiga clan.
So you CAN kill NPCs. So why can't you kill the rest?
>You can't stand 45 minutes of cutscenes.
I can't stand 45 seconds of cutscenes. That's how little they contribute to the medium.
>This alone means you don't have the attention span to read books,
A book does not sell itself as an interactive medium. The equivalent would be a choose-your-own-adventure book, but all the choices are the same and there's only one ending.
You're absolutely right, and I won't deny that. Those games had really bad problems with cinematics and railroading.
Start with BOTW, skip all the memories and story, and then play TOTK, also skipping all the memories and story. It's the best way you can enjoy the games, since Nintendo's ability to write a story is abhorrent, second only to sony.
>I can't stand 45 seconds of cutscenes. That's how little they contribute to the medium.
You accept hours of cutscenes in terrat´ria
No, I don't. This is crucial to understand, but my favorite games are NOT exempt from my rules. Infact I deduct points from their scores just for having these things. How in the hell am I supposed to call myself a fan of a game, if I don't angrily demand improvement from these games? When Terraria released that moronic torch luck mechanic, I didn't roll over and accept it. I yelled and screamed to the point where the devs tweaked in within 1 day. That's how everyone should be towards negative traits of their games.
Then we simply start over. Mince the meat, use it as fertilizer, turn it into grass, feed it to cows, start the process over.
>No you can't stand 45 minutes of any written content. This is blatantly obvious.
I have no problem with books or movies (unless they're braindead marvel slop) but don't try shoving them into an interactive medium.
>A game with cutscenes is still interactive. BoTW, and ToTK are interactive.
Until it curbs your freedom for the sake of the story. Then problems arise.
>Not even close moron.
then again, why can't I kill every Zelda NPC?
It's a Nintendo game that touted itself for giving the player absolute freedom. There shouldn't be any story based limitations. A gameplay based limitation is one thing, since it's something to overcome, but what is there to overcome in a game breaking its own rules just to set up a dumb plot?
>No, I don't. This is crucial to understand, but my favorite games are NOT exempt from my rules
Yes you do, You accept hours of cutscenes in terraria.
Why aren't you against any animation that doesn't require skill?
>you accept hours of cutscenes
[citation needed]
>Then you're moronic. Simple as. It's a Nintendo game.
It's that kind of thinking that restricts ideas like weapon durability, or non-linear dungeon design. Any TOTK or BOTW fan who welcomed those ideas should be able to admit that taking a step out of the comfort zone is not a bad thing, and can lead to great innovation. I'm criticizing the games and even I welcomed weapon durability. The story may be atrocious, and the lack of challenge may be offputting, but being taken out of my comfort zone for the sake of making the game more strategic was a pretty good idea. Then again some of my older favorite games were dark Cloud, so perhaps I',m biased.
>Except you do, because you have an autistic fit in it being included in videogames.
because it goes against interactivity.
>Nope, it's interactive still.
It's not interactive enough. You can claim that TLOU is interactive because the game can't continue unless you press buttons, but I'd hardly call that game a masterpiece.
>Just because you cannot kill every NPC in Zelda doesn't mean it suddenly isn't interactive
it's the reasoning behind it that makes it a problem.
>because it goes against interactivity.
Nope, it doesn't, you interact with the game before the cutscene, and after. You can even interact with the game to skip the cutscene!
>It's not interactive enough.
It is interactive enough! It's interactive enough to be one of the highest selling video-games of all time, again your opinion doesn't decide on what is "interactive enough" and in fact your opinion on it would get you laughed out of every room from every relevant person in the industry.
>it's the reasoning behind it that makes it a problem.
Nope, because it isn't a problem.
So again, go play Tetris, the king of gameplay videogames, and off yourself you ADHD disappointment.
>You can even interact with the game to skip the cutscene!
If the cutscene is skippable, then it is not necessary. Erego Nintendo did not need to waste time and money into it. I can ignore uncompressed audio and voice lines in an AAA game, but that doesn't mean I'm okay with the game being about 300 gb in size.
>It's interactive enough to be one of the highest selling video-games of all time,
If we're going by sales, then Minecraft sold even more. And I'd say pre-MS acquisition, it didn't need cinematics to keep people entertained.
>Nope, because it isn't a problem.
This is the same logic people use to justify TLOU and God of War. Any game journo will say "the excess cutscenes and bad gameplay aren't a problem, muh art!" when clearly they're trying to downplay the issues.
>You refuse to say you want them removed
I'm pretty sure I did, but for clarity' sake, I'll repeat myself.
>no matter how much I love Terraria, I would happily want the cutscenes removed. Infact I would gladly remove the music and the graphics. I would still enjoy the game even if it was Blockman traveling through blockworld to get blocks, with zero further narrative accompaniment
Bless the modding scene for helping me realize this dream.
So why are you not straight up admitting terraria is a moviegame?
>If the cutscene is skippable, then it is not necessary.
Good thing Nintendo doesn't let you skip cutscenes the first time, so by your logic its necessary!
>If we're going by sales, then Minecraft sold even more. And I'd say pre-MS acquisition, it didn't need cinematics to keep people entertained.
That's cool! Minecraft already exists, if there were no cutscenes in the Zelda game, AKA the Zelda aspect, there'd be no reason to just not play Minecraft and Gary's Mod instead. People play Zelda for the Zelda aspects. Including the story.
>This is the same logic people use to justify TLOU and God of War.
Justify the massively profitable, generation spanning blockbuster hits? Justify those ones? Yeah, there isn't a problem with them. I've never played them, and they aren't my kind of game, but they certainly aren't problematic, and justify themselves to the people who love them.
see
>this would happen so I purposefully didn't replay botw for 6 years. I
You refuse to say you want them removed
>taking a step out of the comfort zone
This isn't your comfort zone. It's Nintendo's. They make games for children and don't want their mascots murdering innocents.
Why not? Seems silly to be beholden to a cinematic story for no reason.
Terraria isn't a movie game for one very, VERY crucial reason: I acknowledge its flaws, and actively want them fixed. The same cannot be said of movie games like TLOU or Final Fantasy. Nobody wants to fix the problems, because nobody wants to even acknowledge their existence. When you defend a cutscene as so vital to the game that it would ruin it if the scene didn't exist, what are you left with?
>Good thing Nintendo doesn't let you skip cutscenes the first time, so by your logic its necessary!
Doesn't that make it movieshit, since it's forcing the story on you? I thought only a snoy game did that.
>if there were no cutscenes in the Zelda game, AKA the Zelda aspect, there'd be no reason to just not play Minecraft and Gary's Mod instead.
The story honestly isn't important in a Zelda game. When you think about it, entire aspects of the "story" can be gutted left and right. Zelda isn't necessary (Link's Awakening) the triforce isn't necessary (Majora's Mask) Ganon isn't necessary (four swords, spirit Tracks, phantom Hourglass, etc). It's almost as if Zelda, as a whole, is about the GAMEPLAY. Traversing the world, using your items and wits to overcome obstacles, solving puzzles, surviving monsters, exploring dungeons. These seem far more important to the game than "zomg le princess is in danger".
>Justify the massively profitable, generation spanning blockbuster hits? Justify those ones?
Come on man. Don't be like that. Don't be the guy defending "we don't use the term fun here".
>I acknowledge its flaws, and actively want them fixed
That literally doesn't change wether it is a moviegame or not.
That moronic troony "logic" doesn't even make sense.
The hours of unskippable cutscenes make it one.
>That literally doesn't change wether it is a moviegame or not.
It does to me, because it means that these things are NOT the priority of the game. When you're willing to discard everything for the sake of gameplay, it means the gameplay is the most important, and a game that survives this test is a good game. Someone who claims that a game is good, but only cares about the waifus and storytelling, can they be valued as an arbiter of good judgement?-
>because it means that these things are NOT the priority of the game
What you are crying about doesn't objectively change the priorities of the game, moron.
Terraria has hours of unskippable cutscenes, that makes it a moviegame.
The only good thing about Terraria is the waifus, so now it is a moviegame to you 😉
>Doesn't that make it movieshit, since it's forcing the story on you? I thought only a snoy game did that.
>Moviegame
>45 minutes of cutscene in 100+ hours of gameplay
Nah senpai. you're a buzzword spewing machine, and I'm assuming your entire schtick is to act as moronic as possible to farm (You)'s instead of have an actual conversation
>The story honestly isn't important in a Zelda game.
No, the story is extremely important in a Zelda game. Yes it's the same story every single game, Link saves Zelda, but I want those cutscenes.
Zelda is a modern day fantasy hero story. It hits the same beats, and you want to play again to see Hyrule, Zoras, Gorons, etc. You want to see the same Link saves Zelda story. The story absolutely fricking matters. Alongside Dungeons/puzzles that's the main staple of Zelda games.
>Zelda isn't necessary (Link's Awakening) the triforce isn't necessary (Majora's Mask) Ganon isn't necessary (four swords, spirit Tracks, phantom Hourglass, etc).
Links in all of them. It's about Links story. Link's Awakening is personally one of my favorite all time games since I was an actual child, and the game wouldn't be the same without the story. So I'm not sure how you're using this to defend gutting the story.
>Come on man. Don't be like that. Don't be the guy defending "we don't use the term fun here".
Those games were massively fun to the millions of people who finished them
>BUUUUUUTTTTT THEY'RE NOT FUNNNN TO MEEEEEEEEEE
you're not the main character of life.
>45 minutes of cutscene in 100+ hours of gameplay
Then why does the game need the cutscenes? You'd think that 100 hours of gameplay would act as its own narrative, and it wouldn't need cinematic assistance.
>No, the story is extremely important in a Zelda game. Yes it's the same story every single game,
Except I listed all the times that it wasn't. I didn't care about Zelda in Majora's Mask, I didn't care about the triforce in the Oracle games. What mattered was the gameplay changes. You could discard everything else, as long as the gameplay was functional and, more importantly, brought something to the table. I could not care less about Skull Kid and his angsty drama with his friends that are just testicles on legs. I was there for the masks and how they influenced the gameplay.
>Links in all of them.
Do you even know why his name is Link? He's supposed to be a Link to the Player. Basically a self-insert. You'll notice that he barely has a backstory in most games, he's just a random douchebag with yellow triangles on his arm. That's all the story we needed. Oh, and look. Wind Waker proved that you didn't even need that. You could just find the triforce at random and still be the hero.
>Those games were massively fun to the millions of people who finished them
No offense, but they're all soi chuggers who want games to be "art" and take offense at the concept of fun. So hard pass on that notion.
>What you are crying about doesn't objectively change the priorities of the game, moron.
Oh yes it does! See, I didn;t spend 4000 hours in Terraria for the storytelling or waifus. The gameplay kept me coming back. Nothing else.I gladly discard everything else for the sake of better gameplay.
But I did, o now it is objectively a moviegame by your definition 😉
And you came back for the thousands of hours of cutscenes.
>But I did, o now it is objectively a moviegame by your definition 😉
And the gameplay enthusiast takes priority, and guess which one of that fits the bill.
Makes no sense, unless you consider the same for Splatoon 😉
But I guess Cutscenes are okay if Terraria does them.
I will remember this, btw.
You will never escape this cope in the future 😉
Swear an oath that you will hound this autist to the edges of this board
>And the gameplay enthusiast takes priority, and guess which one of that fits the bill.
So, ToTK? BoTW? Those easily fit the bill. it's a 100+ hour gameplay game, with 45 minutes of cutscene.
Quite obviously the gameplay takes priority. They delayed the game 1 year to finish up any quirks on the physics engine/ultrahand tool.
>Then why does the game need the cutscenes?
Because it sets the mood. People want that, people relate to stories, and want to relate to the characters they're self-inserting as. Videogames are the medium to tell a story, to make an interactive game. In the end it's just interactive programming, and it can be as narrative driven as the games creator wants it to be. Your opinion on what cutscenes should be in or shouldn't be in is irrelevant.
>Do you even know why his name is Link? He's supposed to be a Link to the Player. Basically a self-insert.
Yes, and people want to relate to their self fricking insert.
>Oh, and look. Wind Waker proved that you didn't even need that. You could just find the triforce at random and still be the hero.
And Windwaker has the most expressive link in the entire videogame, with a story still hailed as the best in the Zelda series by many. The story of who he was was large to his popularity
>You could just find the triforce at random and still be the hero.
And people would care about the STORY about why the random guy found it. Windwaker PROVED that.
>No offense, but they're all soi chuggers who want games to be "art" and take offense at the concept of fun. So hard pass on that notion.
And you're a moronic Chud who wants all videogames to be is meaningless time sinks. You personally might want every single game to be the equivalent of cookie clicker, but again you're not the main character in life.
>Because it sets the mood.
Meanwhile I can get the same mood out of Minecraft, with 0.01% of the cutscene amount. Must be that Mojang magic, right?
>Yes, and people want to relate to their self fricking insert.
The only motivation that you need is "I don't want to die". Seems like a good enough reason to sympathize with them.
>And Windwaker has the most expressive link in the entire videogame,
Except that you're not even looking at his face most of the time. You could remove that and the game wouldn't suffer for it much.
>And people would care about the STORY about why the random guy found it
It harkens back to Zelda 1, where some random jerkoff also found the triforce. I don't think I cared one bit about why, I just wanted to fight the evil magic pig in the final dungeon.
>And you're a moronic Chud who wants all videogames to be is meaningless time sinks.
If I was to be so bold, that's what video games are. They can be fun and interactive, but let's not pretend that they're some profound artform.
If the fans stopped jerking off to inkling waifus and stopped considering the games to be some deep cinematic masterpiece, then yes I would give Splatoon the same leniency.
>Those easily fit the bill. it's a 100+ hour gameplay game, with 45 minutes of cutscene.
then again, you shouldn't mind me wanting to get rid of the cutscenes. They are not even 1% of the game, by your own admission, so why cling to them like they are vital?
>If the fans stopped jerking off to inkling waifus and stopped considering the games to be some deep cinematic masterpiece
that's the terraria fanbase, guess that is a moviegame now confirmed.
Why do you love and worship moviegames?
>that's the terraria fanbase, guess that is a moviegame now confirmed.
And I'm willing to apologize for any coomers that do exist in the fandom. all I ask is for even one person to acknowledge the problems with Splatoon, without being a snarky console warrior.
>I don't, because it's your opinion, but it's the wrong opinion to have, and quite frankly a shit take.
It's a shit take to value gameplay above else?
>So why b***h so much they're there?
Because it envelops all discussion. We just had like 5 threads that were nothing but jerking off to waifus. That's why I made this thread infact, to actually have a DISCUSSION about the GAMEPLAY. That's what the zelink fans instructed anyway, so they could have their own threads. but now I'm the bad guy for actually making a gameplay thread?
>They can be an artform, and it's up for the person making the game to decide how they want it to be.
And if the gameplay isn't the primary motivation, then it should be criticized as such.
>Windwaker would be a garbage boring game without the story/links expression.
That's because Wind Waker has a ton of problems, and the story is just a bandaid ontop of a festering wound.
>If I could just care about fighting evil magic pigs I could be easily entertained by garbage 5 dollar indie games littering the steam list.
I'm the kind of guy that can be entertained by flash games on newgrounds, if they had a good enough level of quality. All you have to do is show that you care.
>they make games for children
Majora's Mask was for children,and yet you got to smack Sakon into an early grave.
It's all about everything coming together. you see things only as separate pieces, where I look at it all as a whole. Everything should work in tandem, not get in the way.
>And I'm willing to apologize for any coomers that do exist in the fandom. all I ask is for even one person to acknowledge the problems with Splatoon, without being a snarky console warrior.
literally doesn't change anything about the game.
I unapologize for you, now Terraria is a moviegame again.
>literally doesn't change anything about the game.
I disagree.
>You literally said the only difference between moviegames and non-moviegames is if you feel like it,
See, you missed the point again. Good game encourages discussion because it has fun gameplay. If even one person, JUST ONE, is willing to ackowledge gameplay as important enough to discard everything else, then the game can be considered decent at the least. Such a thing will never happen to a snoy movie,for instance, because not even one person will ever consider gameplay to be important, otherwise they wouldn't like snoy movies.
>Your take is that story shouldn't exist in a videogame, and even if the total cutscene time is 1% of the total play time, you're still arguing it should be removed. This is absolutely a shit take.
Why? Look at your webm for instance. Did the story tell you to make a wacky meme helicopter? Or did you just make it because?
>And nobody is discussing gameplay, they're too busy discussing why you're a moron demanding 1% of the game to be removed.
Because of how it negatively impacts the gameplay. I'd say that's a bit more fruitful than making threads talking about Zelda's cartoonishly fat ass.
>So not ToTK/BoTW.
Then why not get rid of the cutscenes?
>WW is one of the best 3D Zeldas.
Minus the horrendously empty world and unfinished dungeons and pitiful lack of challenge.
>and you're also the kind of guy that has zero influence on videogame development,
Except indie games already give me everything I could ask for. I may not be able to affect AAA devs, but that's a rotting garbage heap anyway, so nothing lost.
>willing to ackowledge gameplay as important enough to discard everything else
Gameplay is never that important. Ever. Because at some point you don't actually need to "discard" everything else for the sake of gameplay.
>the entire reason that games are actually games and aren't just books or movies
>nah senpai it isn't important fr fr no cap
Most people play TF2 for the memes and lore, moviegame confirmed.
And I say so, so even a million people disagreeing wouldn't count.
>I want to discard everything else because the gameplay can be 0.0000000000000001% better!
>no moron it's already fricking done just leave it and improve the gameplay if you want to so badly
>I disagree.
>no argument
I accept your troonycession.
>JUST ONE, is willing to ackowledge gameplay as important enough to discard everything else, then the game can be considered decent at the least.
This doesn't make any sense at all.
You can't use your mental illness to imagine a game is good, ACsnoytroony.
A good game should encourage gameplay enthusiasts to love good gameplay, none of this waifushit overwhelming every single discussion.
>games are dangerously moving closer to being movieshit every day because of companies like snoy and square
>let's keep flying close to the sun
>OH NO MY WINGS BURNT UP ICARUS SAVE ME!
>even the games everyone joked about how they'd become literal movies 10-20 years ago are retaining roughly the amount of cutscenes they had back then, if not slightly less
>the only things getting significantly less interactive are western AAA games, and those come not by adding """more story""" but by heavily scripting the gameplay to make the game look like it "should"
Icarus my fricking ass.
Also Icarus wanted to do something cool and desirable and was punished because it was outside his ability. You're implying cutscenes are good.
>the only things getting significantly less interactive are western AAA games, and those come not by adding """more story""" but by heavily scripting the gameplay to make the game look like it "should"
So as long as you're pressing buttons, it should count as gameplay no matter how tainted it is with cinematic direction. I see.
Quicktime events are not heavily scripted gameplay, they're just cutscenes, on par with pressing A to advance dialogue.
D44M which pays lipservice to being "like the classics" but expects you to constantly clear rooms of respawning waves of demons, and will put you in massive resource drought unless you play into glory kills, is heavily scripted gameplay. It reduces agency you would normally have in moments of gameplay to funnel you through the way the game "should be played", not because the story says it should be played that way but because the developers think it ought to be.
>Quicktime events are not heavily scripted gameplay, they're just cutscenes, on par with pressing A to advance dialogue.
So just like 99 percent of terraria removing blocks.
>A good game should encourage gameplay enthusiasts to love good gameplay, none of this waifushit overwhelming every single discussion.
Lmfao, b***h be praying to the Quran. The only way a popular game won't have waifushit is if it doesnt have women in it.
>The only way a popular game won't have waifushit is if it doesnt have women in it.
>should
You said a single one, and should means nothing.
>Why? Look at your webm for instance. Did the story tell you to make a wacky meme helicopter? Or did you just make it because?
The Helicopter makes battery irrelevant, and it generates battery back when you aren't steering it, making it an endless flying device. But you calling it a wacky meme helicopter is another reason why you keep on proving you're a moron. Even when it's gameplay you don't care about the game play.
>Because of how it negatively impacts the gameplay.
Except it doesn't. It doesn't effect a single thing about the gameplay. You having to watch a 4 minute cutscene inbetween 20 hours of gameplay doesn't negatively impact shit.
>Then why not get rid of the cutscenes?
Because those cutscenes sells themselves millions of games.
>Except indie games already give me everything I could ask for.
You don't have any influence on indie games as much as you do AAA devs. No you didn't cause Terraria devs to do jack shit.
What you do have is main character syndrome however. Which shows while you waste thousands of hours in Terraria doing nothing of value to society.
>UST ONE, is willing to ackowledge gameplay as important enough to discard everything else, then the game can be considered decent at the least
Ah, so by definition you said that so Splatoon isn't a moviegame.
There are literally no moviegames at all, by your definition now.
>Ah, so by definition you said that so Splatoon isn't a moviegame.
Can you find me this one Splatoon fan, then? I'm definitely not a big fan of the game, even without the stupid waifus and story.
>The Helicopter makes battery irrelevant, and it generates battery back when you aren't steering it, making it an endless flying device. But you calling it a wacky meme helicopter is another reason why you keep on proving you're a moron. Even when it's gameplay you don't care about the game play.
If I didn't like it, I would've said that it was bad. I just think it's funny that this apparently rigid story, that we're not allowed to deviate from in any way, let's you build robots and helicopters. So maybe the story isn't important to having fun?
>Except it doesn't. It doesn't effect a single thing about the gameplay. You having to watch a 4 minute cutscene inbetween 20 hours of gameplay doesn't negatively impact shit.
Gutting game mechanics, potential game mechanics, forcing me through tutorials, etc. I'd say that drags the experience down.
>Because those cutscenes sells themselves millions of games.
So it doesn't contribute to the game quality, it's basically the same as pokemon using brand recognition to hide game problems.
>You don't have any influence on indie games as much as you do AAA devs. No you didn't cause Terraria devs to do jack shit.
Remind me again who got torch luck reverted, and who got the devs to revert several other changes? All me, baby.
>you have main character syndrome
I am the main character. Are you not? Sorry to hear.
>If I didn't like it, I would've said that it was bad. I just think it's funny that this apparently rigid story, that we're not allowed to deviate from in any way, let's you build robots and helicopters. So maybe the story isn't important to having fun?
The Story is there because it's the story Nintendo wants to tell. Millions of people buy the game, because they care specifically about the story between Link and Zelda. That's it. People specifically have fun with the game because they're doing it in Hyrule. Which is only important because the story.
>Gutting game mechanics
Adding cutscenes doesn't gut gameplay mechanics
>BUTTT WHY CANT I KILLLLLLLLLL "x" NPC
because they never wanted you to be able to do this. This isn't "GUTTING" gameplay mechanics, because they never intended you to do it.
> forcing me through tutorials
(You) do not have to play it. (You) playing it is irrelevant to the bottom line. Nobody gives a shit about the tutorial, it's there for new people, to Zelda and Gaming. It exists for a reason.
>So it doesn't contribute to the game quality,
Nope, it certainly does. I'd have zero reason to play ToTK if it wasnt for the story/being a zelda game
>Remind me again who got torch luck reverted,
Not you. I don't care enough about Terraria or this autism, but I'm certain I can find dozens of other gamers other than you complaining about the same shit.
You suffer through main character syndrome
>I am the main character. Are you not? Sorry to hear.
No, it's called Main Character Syndrome. You're deluded into thinking you're the MC.
>The Story is there because it's the story Nintendo wants to tell.
I don't think Nintendo wanted to tell a story about a 40 foot tall robot with a penis that spews fire onto a torture stake covered in koroks. Didn't stop people from doing it anyway.
>because they never wanted you to be able to do this.
Their reasoning is pretty poor, to be honest.
>(You) do not have to play it. (You) playing it is irrelevant to the bottom line.
Whether I do play it or not, it still exists. It especially still exists for fans who want to replay the game. Where's the skip button for repeat gamers?
>Nope, it certainly does. I'd have zero reason to play ToTK if it wasnt for the story/being a zelda game
So the gameplay means nothing.
>Not you. I don't care enough about Terraria or this autism, but I'm certain I can find dozens of other gamers other than you complaining about the same shit.
But you said devs don't listen to the fans. Then how did the change get reverted?
Why are you being dishonest? I want to see a Splatoon fan who's willing to acknowledge game problems that can't be discarded because he wants to frick his waifu. Is that so much to ask?
Is there honestly any meaningful difference between the two? Quick time events and
D44M scripted garbage are the same flavor of railroading done for the sake of muh heckin wholesome chungus story.
>fan
You didn't say fan, why are you desperately trying to change your own definition?
Stop trying to move your already moronic goalposts.
>you didn't say fan
Because I forgot. So now I'm rectifying the mistake.
>But this invisible hand bullshit telling you not to do things that are perfectly reasonable and in line with the game's mechanics as presented doesn't fly.
And BOTW and TOTK suffer from these as well. Tell me, for instance, why I can't sneak into the gerudo fortress without the stupid crossdressing outfit. Why do the guards have magic see-all vision even at night, when nobody is around?
>problem has one specific solution that plays into one of the game's new mechanics (interchangeable armor that comes in pieces)
>has story reasoning to explain this problem to the player
>"invisible hand"
Nope. That is the game having hard lines where my agency ends and the boundaries of the game begin.
>problem has one specific solution
And yet if a shrine had one specific solution, you'd call it bad game design.
No? Shrines with one fricking solution would be nice.
Do you think I actually prefer TOTK over classic zelda? God no. I like it, it's not my favorite Zelda.
Well, I don't mind the shrines having multiple solutions. I more take issue with them being too easy. Why the main story can't have that kind of non-linearity more often, I can't say.
>That's the gameplay aspect. It's not the story Nintendo is telling. That's (YOU)r gameplay.
then why isn't there a checker that prevents you from making things that are immersion breaking? Shouldn't Nintendo prevent you from making flaming swastikas? "the story shouldn't impede the gameplay!" then I should be able to kill NPCs, seems simple enough.
>Doesn't matter their reasoning. It's their game.
And it's my criticism.
>Without the other elements of the game, yes 100% correct
Without story and characters and waifus, I'd still play Minecraft. Isn't Zelda supposed to be better?
>Never said that. Saying the Devs didn't listen to (YOU) specifically doesn't mean they don't listen to the overwhelming fan opinion.
But you're still admitting that complaining enough can get something changed. Which vindicates my routine.
The main story is absolutely riddled with nonlinearity. It's completely destroyed by it, even. The nonlinearity makes them flatly repeat the same information over and over. It's nauseating. Nonlinearity to the degree the game already has objectively causes problems.
All I'm saying is that Minecraft and Terraria soundly avoid this problem.
And so does Ocarina of Time, which came years before either.
Both moviegames.
there is a cutscene at the end of MC tard
>then why isn't there a checker that prevents you from making things that are immersion breaking?
Nothing is immersion breaking
> Shouldn't Nintendo prevent you from making flaming swastikas?
nope
>the story shouldn't impede the gameplay
it doesnt
> then I should be able to kill NPCs, seems simple enough.
nope. Nintendo makes it clear Link will never have any urges to kill NPCs.
>But you're still admitting that complaining enough can get something changed. Which vindicates my routine.
Its a free world, you can complain as much as you want. In the end the Terraria devs made the decision to change, and no matter how much protesting happens, it'll always be the devs choice in the end.
>Nothing is immersion breaking
So a "hero" making obscene imagery and nazi swastikas isn't immersion breaking?
>nope. Nintendo makes it clear Link will never have any urges to kill NPCs
Then Majora's Mask is gonna have something to say.
>Its a free world, you can complain as much as you want. In the end the Terraria devs made the decision to change, and no matter how much protesting happens, it'll always be the devs choice in the end.
Discarding the mod scene, of course.
>So a "hero" making obscene imagery and nazi swastikas isn't immersion breaking?
Correct. It doesn't impede his ability to save Hyrule or anybody else in any way.
>Then Majora's Mask is gonna have something to say.
Majoras Mask's link isn't ToTKs link. They're literally different people.
>Discarding the mod scene, of course.
Not canon.
>it doesn't impede his ability to save Hyrule or anybody else in any way.
Him doing that means he isn't saving hyrule. a "hero" shouldn't be allowed to mess around while the world needs saving.
>Majoras Mask's link isn't ToTKs link. They're literally different people.
Same franchise, and Nintendo hasn't disavowed Majora's Mask as a bad game.
Well, I guess you have nothing else to contribute.
Why can't you argue in good faith without trying to move the goalposts?
You said
so nothing you said matters
>Why can't you argue in good faith without trying to move the goalposts?
This coming from the guy who started out the thread calling me a troony and a homosexual? I do not believe you are in a position to argue over someone talking in good faith.
Bad faith arguments that pretend to be in good faith are worse than people just screaming buzzwords and insults. You can tune out the latter much more easily.
That's what you were doing though. Trying to pretend to be in good faith, while spewing insults. Tanked your whole argument.
Still not a fan of Splatoon, so it doesn't get that protection no matter how hard you try and force it. A multiplayer game with poor online servers and a lack of a proper server browser is basically a movie game since it only cares about squid dicky and not actual gameplay quality.
And since you acknowledge me as someone who values gameplay, you should agree with me. Why do you disagree with a gameplay enthusiast?
Do you believe gameplay as important enough to discard everything else, easy question.
Answer it
>That's what you were doing though
I'm not him. I'm stepping in to inform you that this is how everyone views it. Bad faith that pretends to be good faith is more insulting than stupidity.
How am I arguing in bad faith?
Yes, I do. Which is why I dislike Splatoon, there's too much non-gameplay cluttering it, whether you consider it a movie game or not.
So it's at least decent, I accept your concession
Splatoon isn't downright horrible shit like TLOU or God of Soi, but it's extremely overrated, if you want me to be fair. I'll give you that concession.
If people stopped calling me a homosexual and a troony, maybe their arguments wouldn't be so easy to discard. Am I not giving you that same consideration by refusing to resort to insults?
Nah, only terraria is overrated movieshit
>Am I not giving you that same consideration by refusing to resort to insults?
blaming me for the actions of others is ten times more insulting than any name you could call me. You are giving me no consideration by thoughtlessly throwing around accusations that some people are responsible for the actions of others. Unless you're implying I'm the fricking PARENT of everyone on fricking Ganker, then I'm not responsible for shit. No, I don't care what other people who like the games I like say or do. No, I am not negligent in my lack of care.
If you refuse to even disavow the bad faith posters, aka
,
then who's to say you aren't in league with them? You're content sitting there and watching them ruin the thread by calling me a troony and a homosexual, and yet I'M the bad guy because i think these games aren't perfect masterpieces?? I dared to voice a viewpoint that was contrarian to what's popular, and this gives you adequate cause to bring out the pitchforks?
Ignoring
Is bad faith on your end.
It is the logical end of YOUR definition
Only if you don't take into account a typo that I made and acknowledged, but you refuse to let go of because you're being obtuse. I wanted the FANS of their respective franchises to acknowledge gameplay as the most important. Either argue that point, or don't bother responding.
>It was jumped on because it's ludicrous. Zero of TotK's major issues are caused by it being "too cinematic". All of its major issues stem solely from the gameplay decisions they made before story was even on the table.
And these problems were made even worse because the game didn't want to give the player actual freedom, just a shoddy facsimile of it. Why shouldn't I blame the story for causing these problems?
So you can understand why I would hate the story in all of these games? If the gameplay is good, I want more of it. "needing context" is nonsense that only started because game devs were hacks who thought themselves on par with hollywood writers.
Because the game's problems are not in any way made worse by any of the times it decides to restrict your freedom. The story constantly suffers for gameplay the devs THOUGHT was better without actually considering anything. Thus, blaming the story is insane.
>Because the game's problems are not in any way made worse by any of the times it decides to restrict your freedom.
This is the entire problem with the tutorials. They felt that the story was so important that the tutorial is forced on the player without any say, when any rational game would let you AT LEAST skip it. But that's not even an option because MUH DEEP AND EPIC STORY.
>Why should you be allowed to change your definition,
Because it's my argument in the first place, and if I say I made a typo, I have every right to correct it?
>They felt that the story was so important that the tutorial is forced on the player
The tutorials were there because Nintendo doesn't want to give new players the option to skip something they might actually not know. The story is not the reason.
No, why should you be allowed to change your argument after losing?
Why are you ignoring
In bad faith?
A good game shouldn't need protection. If it's not a movie game, then the gameplay should be capable of surviving on its own, and fans shouldn't get a bee in their bonnet if I want the non-gameplay gone.
Then why did you mention protecting games like terraria?
I guess you don't think it is a good game
>typo
Not what a typo is.
Why should you be allowed to change tour definition, that is just bad faith arguing
>wanted the FANS of their respective franchises to acknowledge gameplay as the most important.
You just got that, so now you are never allowed to complain about them being movie games again.
I can still complain about movieshit infesting the games, and if the fans say that the game is unplayable without it, then that presents a small, tiny, eensie weensie problem. I can complain about Terraria's ending cutscene being dumb movieshit, but still highly praise the game. I just have to be willing to admit that the flaws exist. I can still like the game regardless, just like how I can still praise TOTK for some of its gameplay systems, while having a hate of the dumb story, or how I can at least praise Splatoon for being a colorful alternative take on shooters, in an era that was just brown cowadoody clones, while still hating the lack of challenge and abysmal server quality. See, I'm willing to make concessions, but I will not buy into blind dicksucking of any corporate product.
>The tutorials were there because Nintendo doesn't want to give new players the option to skip something they might actually not know.
So now the entire concept of a tutorial should be unskippable for every single game? Should every cutscene be unskippable too? Should the player basically be made to skip all gameplay so the plot can be shoved down their throat, so they don't "skip it by accident"? Is this peak game design?
>No, why should you be allowed to change your argument after losing?
Because I say that my argument was different. You misinterpreted it.
>misinterpreted
It is literally what you said.
And I didn't mean to use that phrasing. Whoopsie.
>Just that your assumption that this was done for the sake of "muh cinema" is wrong
It doesn't seem to have other justifications. It just screams lazy.
>It's that simple. The gameplay being good doesn't mean the non-gameplay is bad.
When I try to talk about the game and get drowned out by waifu posters, then yes I'd say the non-gameplay is bad. It's attracting a wrong crowd.
If it makes you feel better, I'll avoid calling them movie games, but I'll still complain about the movieshit infesting them. Me liking a game does not magically mean that the game has no problems. I like Metroid Dread, for instance, but the cinematic QTEs are movieshit, through and through. I do not like nor want them.
The issue with TOTk's gameplay is that it's inconsistent. The game limits your weapons for the sake of asking you to think strategically and not just rush to get the strongest weapon, but then it gives you 3 pages of healing items and infinite storage, so you never have to plan an expedition, you can just haul 5 trillion pounds of garbage in your napsack. It would've been so much more preferable if they asked you to survive a bit more,instead of holding your hand.
>And I didn't mean to use that phrasing. Whoopsie
Bad faith argument changing.
Sorry.
>When tutorials are skippable, there exist a large proportion of players who really, really need them, but still assume they don't and move on.
This is absurd because it completely clashes with the game's "you can go anywhere" motto. You can skip the entire game and rush right to ganondorf, but the tutorial needs to be shoved in the player's face? It's too much of a contradiction to blame lazy game design. I genuinely still hold that they did it for story reasons. They felt that the player needed to have Zelda constantly narrate to them and have the king spew his sob story. Any other explanation would just be wacko.
>it completely clashes with the game's "you can go anywhere" motto
Motto stated where? And to what extent?
The fact is that the cinematic reasons you're screeching about were not considered. Nintendo was pandering to the "y cant metroid crawl" crowd. It's that fricking simple.
>Motto stated where? And to what extent?
Did you not see the marketing campaign for BOTW? How they gloated in interviews how you could just skip the whole game and rush right to Ganon? That was a selling point. And don't tell me it wasn't also a selling point that the fans proclaimed as shiny and innovative. If freedom isn't the name of the game, then Ganon shouldn't be approachable unless you kill all 4 blights.
>Nintendo was pandering to the "y can't metroid crawl" crowd
And I shall consider the game worse for it.
>m-marketing
>and you CAN do it
>that means the entire game should be designed the same way and any exception to that must be "muh cinema"
Wrong. They were simply trying to avoid losing the moron market.
>They were simply trying to avoid losing the moron market.
No offense, but an audience that buys broken Pokemon rehashes in the tens of millions, every single year, is not an audience that's gonna get lost. This is an audience that will buy 70 dollar remakes of SNES games, without question. I think their income is guaranteed, so why not take a little risk?
I'm of the same mind as far as whether they should take risk, but clearly Nintendo isn't. They would rather have people who want even more freedom complaining about the tutorial, when they know most people are wowed by the nonlinearity of the rest of the game, than have people complain about things they'd know if they didn't skip the tutorial.
Of course, I think the "risk" they should take is making harder games, not more freeform ones.
If them gutting freedom made for a better game, then I would be all for it. Limitations based on gameplay progression are fine, and so many of Nintendo's titles are built on the idea. Limitations based on story are what cause problems. I don't want to be told that I can't infiltrate the gerudo hideout because that would be sexist or Link is a good boi who doesn't do that. Being told that I need stealth to enter the yiga clan hideout, because their guards do obscene amounts of damage, is just better.
The gameplay reason that you can't exit the tutorial early is that they operate on the unfortunate assumption that people who really need the tutorial are essential consumers. Once again, I disagree with that assessment, but it is what it is.
The gameplay reason that you can't simply fight or sneak your way into Gerudo Town is that as a town, you are ultimately meant to be there on friendly terms, and with the other three areas being wet (no climbing), hot (need fire resist armor), and cold (need cold resist armor), they wanted an armor-requiring condition you couldn't beat simply by reusing armor from an old area. But with "no armor required", "hot armor" and "cold armor" already covered, all three spots on the temperature spectrum were occupied, and every other armor set effect was impossible to make a hard requirement out of. So instead, they made armor that disguised you from the guards, and made the disguise mandatory.
>The gameplay reason that you can't exit the tutorial early is that they operate on the unfortunate assumption that people who really need the tutorial are essential consumers.
They might never listen, but Nintendo needs to shake this attitude that the essential consumers won't instantly buy anything with their brand on the cover. They've secured a loyal fanbase for life, and the days when they only made slightly less profit (aka the WiiU and Wii) are long gone.
>The gameplay reason that you can't simply fight or sneak your way into Gerudo Town is that as a town, you are ultimately meant to be there on friendly terms,
And this is what they should've learned from OOT. The gerudo eventually become friendly there, but you have to fight them first. Why couldn't BOTW Link be given the same opportunity? It's missed gameplay potential for whatever reason.
>Nintendo needs to shake this attitude that the essential consumers won't instantly buy anything with their brand on the cover
I feel exactly the same. Though the games I hope to get out of this change are wholly different from the ones you do, I'm sure.
>The gerudo eventually become friendly there, but you have to fight them first. Why couldn't BOTW Link be given the same opportunity?
Because none of the other areas that require armor let you eventually get rid of it. The cold area remains cold even with Vah Medoh calmed. The hot area remains hot even with Vah Rudania calmed. Making Gerudo Town the exception would be inconsistent.
Really, if anything, I think they should've committed a bit more with a "beautifying" food effect. Mirage fruit or something. Mythical fruit that makes people see you as whatever it takes to not be hostile. Against enemies, give it a similar effect to the monster masks. Let the Yiga see through it, since they abuse Sheikah techniques and that includes the lens of truth.
Of course, that would be a lot to code for mechanical parity when this works just as well.
>Making Gerudo Town the exception would be inconsistent.
Isn't it already inconsistent when you consider that the rito don't even require armor? Last I recall, I don't remember any flying-specific armor to be mandatory. I think you just need the glider. Besides, making these quests dependent on armor is a bit silly. The armor should only be necessary because hot and cold are primordial elements that you'd need protection from regardless, so you'd get them even if you weren't after the quests.
>the rito don't even require armor
But the Hebra region does. It's cold, it requires cold armor or cold resist food effects, just as Death Mountain requires fire resist armor or food effects.
>The armor should only be necessary because hot and cold are primordial elements that you'd need protection from regardless
But making entire areas that showcase them and ensuring the main quest takes you to an area that showcases each is good design. Making the first area require none but impose its own kind of limit is one thing, making the final area require none and impose no limits other than "do the quest to gain full access to the area" is another.
>But the Hebra region does.
I don't recall it even being snowy near Rito village. but I guess it was close enough because I remember grinding three lynels on the snowy plain afterward, so maybe I just forgot after three years. My last playthrough was around 2019.
>Making the first area require none but impose its own kind of limit is one thing, making the final area require none and impose no limits other than "do the quest to gain full access to the area" is another.
I still disagree on the concept because there's no challenge whatsoever to the gerudo portion. With using the hot armor and cold armor, there's still a threat of dying because of the extremely high cliffs of the snowy areas, and the lava of Death Mountain. putting on ladies' undergarments just doesn't scream "danger" or "adventure". It just sounds like they ran out of time and had to rush the quest.
The entire northwest portion of the map is cold, though not all of it requires cold resist armor at all times.
>putting on ladies' undergarments just doesn't scream "danger" or "adventure".
At this point you're basically admitting that your issue isn't with the actual requirement of wearing the armor, but with the fact that the desert surrounding it doesn't provide enough danger for your tastes, and the armor doesn't relate to what danger the desert does pose.
I disagree. The issue with the desert is that the best part of BOTW navigation is turning height into horizontal distance via climbing and gliding. Even that gets samey after a while, but the desert just didn't have enough going on to replace it. No aspect of navigating the world ever felt treacherous to me, in honesty.
>The entire northwest portion of the map is cold, though not all of it requires cold resist armor at all times.
Yeah, that's what confused me. If you look at Rito Village, it doesn't even look like it's near a snowy climate.
>At this point you're basically admitting that your issue isn't with the actual requirement of wearing the armor, but with the fact that the desert surrounding it doesn't provide enough danger for your tastes, and the armor doesn't relate to what danger the desert does pose.
It just doesn't feel videogamey enough. Up until the yiga base infiltration, it just basically feels like a miniature visual novel. You talk to some schmuck in the Bazaar, he sells you lady undergarments, then you walk into the town, then you talk to Riju, and then you're told to retrieve the thunder helm. It's all so boring. In a desert that has Moldugas and other threats wandering, you'd think they'd require a bit more thought.
>The issue with the desert is that the best part of BOTW navigation is turning height into horizontal distance via climbing and gliding. Even that gets samey after a while, but the desert just didn't have enough going on to replace it. No aspect of navigating the world ever felt treacherous to me, in honesty.
This would've been a good place to improve that issue. Maybe make the approach to the gerudo outpost extremely hazardous, like have a constant and permanent thunderstorm overhead due to Vah Naboris, so you can't have metal equipment, and then take a page out of Final Fantasy 4's playbook and have enemies weak to metal equipment around the outpost. I dunno, make it so you have the chance to rescue the gerudo using your hero skills during a lightning storm, and they give you an exclusive VIP voe pass.
>it doesn't even look like it's near a snowy climate.
Mountainous terrain and pine trees.
>It just doesn't feel videogamey enough.
Annnnnnd you've lost me. There's many critiques to be had here, but "the solution doesn't feel videogamey"? When it's achieved through the mechanics and it happens entirely in video game form? No. That's inane. The desert being flat and the only real hazard not being directly between you and the friendly location are both entirely innocuous decisions; BotW was doomed in my eyes long before then because there just wasn't enough variety, I was 100% phoning it in when I got to the desert anyway. Putting a lot of extra effort into the desert specifically would also have been overly specific.
>make it so you have the chance to rescue the gerudo using your hero skills during a lightning storm, and they give you an exclusive VIP voe pass
Your insistence that the only good solution is one where you don't have to change your armor to get into gerudo town is out of place. It's a very simple requirement enforced entirely through mechanics. You can b***h about the fact that the mechanics are dressed up with a story reason all you like; it's still mechanics first, and thus still videogamey.
>Mountainous terrain and pine trees.
I'm pretty sure the great plateau is almost as high in terms of sheer elevation, so it feels a bit inconsistent (especially when adding in the height of the shiekah towers), but I guess at that point it's a personal nitpick.
>When it's achieved through the mechanics and it happens entirely in video game form? No.
It doesn't feel earned. It's like using the stone mask in Majora's Mask, instead of having to knock out the pirates while infiltrating their base. It feels cheap, and it made me groan when I found the mask for the first time. Dunno why I thought of using the lens of truth in a completely random spot in the dead canyons, but it worked.
>Your insistence that the only good solution is one where you don't have to change your armor to get into gerudo town is out of place.
It doesn't make sense to require armor that has no real use anywhere else. To my knowledge, the defense bonus is terrible, and can it even be upgraded? You're asking me to use something that I'll never use again. It is quite literally on par with weapons/tools you'd use once and then never again, akin to like the spinner in Twilight Princess, or the hover boots in OOT. Strip the story reason out, and the outfit really doesn't have an excuse to exist. the hot and cold armor are still useful even if you never touch the divine beasts, but this? this ain't no hookshot or hermes boots.
>but I guess at that point it's a personal nitpick
The plateau also did have pine trees, didn't it? It had some less coniferous forests too, though.
>It's like using the stone mask in Majora's Mask
... I'm starting to think you think "videogamey" means "violence".
>It doesn't make sense to require armor that has no real use anywhere else.
It has "real use" throughout the desert too, actually, with a level in both heat and cold resistance so you don't have to mix and match armor sets (thus compromising any relevant bonuses) or constantly switch armor sets when you're out in the desert. But neither of those is a unique function, so they gave it a unique function as well, and showcased it.
Once again it feels like you're implying "videogamey" means "violence". As in, "if the threat presented by not using this won't kill me then it's not videogamey enough".
>The plateau also did have pine trees, didn't it? It had some less coniferous forests too, though.
Kinda foggy, so I don't remember (I mean memory foggy, not game foggy)
>... I'm starting to think you think "videogamey" means "violence".
When I think videogame, I think action. Be it through combat, puzzles, exploration, any of those are fine. When I get basically a free ticket to breeze through any potential problems, it feels cheap and unearned. I pine for the days of OOT's gerudo infiltration segment, since whether you wanted to fight the gerudo or not, you still had to navigate their rather stupidly complex fortress, which had more thought put into it than some of the dungeons did. Not massively complex, but enough to make you think spatially.
>It has "real use" throughout the desert too, actually, with a level in both heat and cold resistance so you don't have to mix and match armor sets
I can't remember a situation where using the heat or cold armors wasn't just better. Again I don't recall you even being able to upgrade the armor, so even for convenience sake it still loses out to the dedicated armor sets. it becomes clutter.
>As in, "if the threat presented by not using this won't kill me then it's not videogamey enough".
I AM supposed to be saving the world from ganon's demons and minions, so the threat should be constantly present.
>When I get basically a free ticket to breeze through any potential problems
That's really not how it feels to me, at least not compared to how most of BOTW/TOTK's problems are presented.
>I can't remember a situation where using the heat or cold armors wasn't just better.
Once again, if you don't want to switch back and forth on a long desert outing or rely on food, that's a use right there. You can say the convenience isn't worth it to you, but at this point I think you're just splitting hairs because you already decided to hate the gerudo armor in concept and now you need to hate every application it has.
>I AM supposed to be saving the world from ganon's demons and minions
And I AM also playing a videogame, and I recognize that from a bird's eye view any setback is still a setback. Not every threat has to be presented as world-ending for me to find it worthwhile.
>That's really not how it feels to me, at least not compared to how most of BOTW/TOTK's problems are presented.
A majority of the game just felt like free-wins. Koroks didn't help, because most were braindead and trivial, and the shrines didn't help either when you consider that 20 of them were braindead competitions against the same rehashed basic enemy, sometimes with slightly inflated stats. It felt like the game was afraid of challenging me.
>Once again, if you don't want to switch back and forth on a long desert outing or rely on food, that's a use right there.
At that point you're basically drowning in food. No limitations on regular items + 3 massive pages for healing items = you never once have to contemplate this as a danger.
>at this point I think you're just splitting hairs because you already decided to hate the gerudo armor in concept and now you need to hate every application it has.
I'm attacking it because the applications are weaker than dedicated armors. If it had some unique practical usage that no other armor could provide, outside of some silly quest, then that would be another thing. Why couldn't it provide lightning immunity, and have the thunder helm be sort of an upgrade to the head piece? Combine it with the rubber outfit in that aspect. Make it upgradable and have Riju gift you the upgrade for a reward, like how you can do a sidequest to use the thunder helm yourself. Lacking upgrades is a huge downgrade compared to armors that let you have complete fire immunity, for example. Even in its extremely niche use, it falls behind any other armor.
>Not every threat has to be presented as world-ending for me to find it worthwhile.
For me, the threats need to be credible, or they become laughable.
>A majority of the game just felt like free-wins
Yes, that's my point. The Gerudo outfit is in line with the rest of the game's problem solving.
>At that point you're basically drowning in food.
And I still prefer using armor rather than having a perpetual resource drain.
>If it had some unique practical usage that no other armor could provide, outside of some silly quest,
"If it had some unique practical usage that no other armor could provide, outside of [unique practical usage that no other armor could provide]"
The thunder helm actually works as a substitute for the gerudo outfit's headpiece, funny enough.
>For me, the threats need to be credible, or they become laughable.
And for me, all challenges are ultimately "just challenges"; all obstacles are obstacles whether presented lethally or not.
>Yes, that's my point. The Gerudo outfit is in line with the rest of the game's problem solving.
And I'm saying that's a problem. even Zora's domain had the courtesy to acknowledge you finding a way to the king before even meeting Sidon, they couldn't do something similar here? and yes, I know of that bug that lets you get to Riju without even touching the city because of dislocated event flags, but the game doesn't even acknowledge it, and you still don't get access to the city.
>And I still prefer using armor rather than having a perpetual resource drain.
If resources were actually scarce, this might be a legitimate point.
>"If it had some unique practical usage that no other armor could provide, outside of [unique practical usage that no other armor could provide]"
A glorified gate key that exists only to let you into a tiny city is far from my idea of "practical".
>And for me, all challenges are ultimately "just challenges"
Not all challenges are created equal.
>And I'm saying that's a problem.
And I'm saying that since it's not out of line with the rest of the game, complaining about it in particular feels like your critiques don't actually come from a logical and grounded place, but instead, as I said, a belief that "videogame" should mean "violence and action".
>If resources were actually scarce, this might be a legitimate point.
Don't care about scarcity. Still don't like using them.
>A glorified gate key that exists only to let you into a tiny city is far from my idea of "practical".
A key is one of the most practical things there is.
>Not all challenges are created equal.
An obstacle is an obstacle. It doesn't have to be equal to register as an obstacle.
I complain about it in particular because it's the worst aspect of the game. I don't recall in any other region, where you can just pay money and have your problems magically disappear. Would it have been too much to ask to give the gerudo armor some upward mobility, aka upgrading? Would it have hurt to make it so you have to fight someone for the armor, instead of just buying it? There's just no thought in it. Compare it to, oh say, Zora's Domain. The constant raining provides a CHALLENGE. You can't just mindlessly climb everything, now you have to think twice and traverse the region a little more carefully. Death mountain has constant lava and fire and even an ignited talus here and there, so you can't just survive a small fall. The gerudo just lacks in comparison. even the molduga I mentioned is something I didn't even come across until after the quest.
>Don't care about scarcity. Still don't like using them.
I'm not a big fan of them either, but the outfit is too situational for me to care about it.
>A key is one of the most practical things there is.
Nah. Useless items like the spinner and the dominion rod are also keys, but they stop having use after their respective dungeon, a key issue of one of TP's shortcomings.
>An obstacle is an obstacle.
And if it doesn't offer some kind of thought provoking challenge, it is a laughable obstacle.
>I don't recall in any other region, where you can just pay money and have your problems magically disappear
Both the eldin and hebra regions contain shops selling armor that resists their prevailing climate difficulties. I understand that the desert is lackluster, I even agree, but your overwhelming focus on it still feels misplaced.
>I'm not a big fan of them either, but the outfit is too situational for me to care about it.
Still reinforcing my point.
>Useless items like the spinner and the dominion rod are also keys
And they're fun while they last. That matters about as much as continued use, in my eyes.
>And if it doesn't offer some kind of thought provoking challenge, it is a laughable obstacle.
And almost the entirety of BOTW is on that same level of thought provoking. You only object to the gerudo clothes because you dislike their presentation.
>Both the eldin and hebra regions contain shops selling armor that resists their prevailing climate difficulties
You still have to deal with the climate dangers, like lava and fire. You don't magically get immunity to fire, for instance, you have to upgrade your armor for that. Why couldn't the gerudo suit have upgrade potential?
>Still reinforcing my point.
The point is that it's useless, a stopgap between two far superior armors.
>And they're fun while they last.
"While they last"? They should last the whole game. This is why older Zeldas had better items. There's never a situation where you wouldn't want to be able to jump with the roc's feather, or have faster speed with the hermes boots. They had practical use all through the game.
>And almost the entirety of BOTW is on that same level of thought provoking
At least in Death Mountain I still had to be wary of my step. The rest of the game having problems does not magically excuse the gerudo being lazy.
>You still have to deal with the climate dangers, like lava and fire.
And? The desert's hazards are something you can never completely disregard due to armor, and you're just as likely to actually fall prey to them.
>The point is that it's useless
And you're only so upset about that because it's flavored in a way you turn your nose up at.
>They should last the whole game
I agree, but marking a weapon down into "genuinely bad" because it doesn't is unfair.
>The rest of the game having problems does not magically excuse the gerudo being lazy
And the gerudo being on par with the rest of the game warrants special criticism because...?
>And? The desert's hazards are something you can never completely disregard due to armor,
I can't even remember the last threat that existed in the desert region. No joke, I may have died once or twice on death mountain, but the threats were basically nonexistent in the desert. You have a giant lightning spewing robot llama there, and yet it plays no part in the actual danger of the region, not that I remember anyway. again, why couldn't the whole region just be under one giant lightning cloud, and combine the gerudo set with the rubber armor set? Now it has practical function outside of the gerudo desert, and as a bonus it even fits into the elemental theme next to the hot and cold armors.
>And you're only so upset about that because it's flavored in a way you turn your nose up at.
If something exists in a game, it better do a good job of justifying itself.
>you just want more violence involved in the quest
Yes, as a matter of fact. I want to fight or solve puzzles. Infact I demand that from every divine beast quest. I wanted more oomph.
>I agree, but marking a weapon down into "genuinely bad" because it doesn't is unfair.
I disagree. Seeing the disappointment of the hover boots in OOT can very easily make me hate something. And what a shock, wearing it outside of its niche situations is actually detrimental, since it's slightly slower than just walking.
>And the gerudo being on par with the rest of the game warrants special criticism because...?
The rest of the game's problems can be tweaked with a few minor changes. The gerudo desert quest needs a complete overhaul in its structure, one I outlined earlier. see
Instead of the whole "sneaking in" BS, why not have it involve a large battle where you fight alongside the gerudo to kill enemies who take advantage of the lightning strikes? What an opportunity it could've been to introduce lightning wizzrobes who can manipulate lightning and take 100% damage from metal weapons.
Your entire argument can at this point be reduced to
>I want more things in games to be boiled down to either hitting it, finding a way around it, or finding a way to survive going through it
Which is inherently boring to me. I value variety much more.
>I want more things in games to be boiled down to either hitting it, finding a way around it, or finding a way to survive going through it
Compared to
>just let me spend some money so I can skip any kind of puzzle solving or fighting or anything that requires thought
But you aren't skipping anything by spending money.
Spending money is the one and only way to get into gerudo town, and getting into gerudo town is the one and only way to finish the main quest in that area.
You can chant night and day about how you "deserve" to beat the shit out of the gerudo or whatever- and don't lie, that's ultimately what you want to do- but it's just not how the game is designed.
I consider it a waste of potentially fun gameplay. The gerudo are warriors, why can't I fight them as warriors? OOT and MM let me do it, and to be honest they were no better than their OOT incarnations. In their cases, both are idiots held back by traditions that frankly paint them to be dunderheads. Why can't I at least have a section of stealth employed, where I can easily fail and be thrown out? If we're going this far, why not take all the gerudo shops and put them in the kara bazaar, and have the gerudo outpost just be one giant fortress? Here's some lore for you: make it so the actual gerudo town was destroyed by Vah Naboris, and the fortress was constructed to protect against lightning strikes. Would've made some great imagery to see the fortress, covered in lightning rods from a distance, so you get an accurate danger of Vah Naboris and the threat it poses to the region. You could even base sidequests around it, like moving the gerudo in the bazaar back to the fortress, or vice versa, and have them ambushed by desert enemies. There's so much potential that's ripe for the picking, and they went with the lazy route.
Aaaaand here it is. The real issue. Your definition of "videogamey" being "bang bang smash smash wahoo i solved the puzzle".
You can wax poetic all you want about the hypothetical merits of your solution, but ultimately all you want is the ability to do the same thing as you do for the entire rest of the game: violence. You believe that violence is the ultimate form of fun. You wish games were comprised entirely of problem solving, primarily through violence and other highly visceral means.
This is not a point worth engaging with.
>your preferred method of problem solving is violence?
And it doesn't work.
And you're protesting that because you believe that the end all be all of video games is "whee smashy smash slashy slash I WIN!!!" and you're upset games aren't entirely composed of that.
>you believe that the end all be all of video games is "whee smashy smash slashy slash I WIN!!!"
Until there's an ending where I can talk ganon into submission, might makes right.
I pity you, genuinely. You believe that all there is to games is hitting things until you're told you win. You can go ahead and put another chad next to it, that still won't make it correct.
There are games that quite literally let me punch things until I win, and they're no worse for wear for it. Sometimes I'm punching an enemy, sometimes I'm punching a puzzle. It's all the same. I'm sorry that violence is a foreign concept, in a game where you wield a sword, with the express intent to murder bad guys.
And you're right, that doesn't make those games any worse.
But one game being good doesn't make a game that's unlike it bad.
If the execution could be better, and I could easily prove it through examples, then yes it is worse because of it. BOTW is supposed to be about freedom, and I shouldn't be shamed for wanting to take a more aggressive route. The game should've offered me that, instead of limiting me.
See
Stop bad faith ignoring
>Sorry
Not accepted.
>It doesn't seem to have other justifications. It just screams lazy.
I just explained it to you. When tutorials are skippable, there exist a large proportion of players who really, really need them, but still assume they don't and move on. Nintendo has (though I feel this is incorrect) chosen to prevent this from happening rather than allowing exceptional players the option to just skip.
>It's attracting a wrong crowd
Don't care. It also attracted me.
>So now the entire concept of a tutorial should be unskippable for every single game?
I'm not saying Nintendo's reasoning here was correct. Just that your assumption that this was done for the sake of "muh cinema" is wrong. I do not have to think TOTK is perfect, or even good, to recognize that your critique of it comes from the wrong place.
>If it's not a movie game, then the gameplay should be capable of surviving on its own
Correct.
>and fans shouldn't get a bee in their bonnet if I want the non-gameplay gone
Deeply, massively incorrect.
It's that simple. The gameplay being good doesn't mean the non-gameplay is bad.
No you can't.
You are literally never allowed to call them movie games again, by your definition.
>I dared to voice a viewpoint that was contrarian to what's popular, and this gives you adequate cause to bring out the pitchforks?
You are the original poster of this thread. Your very initial point was not jumped on by these people because it was contrary to what's popular. It was jumped on because it's ludicrous. Zero of TotK's major issues are caused by it being "too cinematic". All of its major issues stem solely from the gameplay decisions they made before story was even on the table.
So... Yes. There was adequate cause from the first moment. You were wrong. You were told such. And you immediately leapt to your own defense with even wilder accusations.
The people who just call you a moron instead of engaging with your point have every right to. They might be stupid, but it's neither my job to condemn them nor my responsibility to try and rein them in.
The same logic applies to all games 😉
TLOU and GOW are fricking amazing games lmao wtf are you on about
You are arguing in bad faith by choosing to stop acknowledging rather than accepting when you completely lose a point. Repeatedly. at length.
>protection
Why are you protecting movie games?
>protection
Why would a game need protection?
Either it is or it isn't a moviegame
See
Do you believe gameplay as important enough to discard everything else, then not moviegame
>So a "hero" making obscene imagery and nazi swastikas
Nazis don't exist in the Hyrule Timeline. Neither do Humans.
Nah, too late.
I'm not accepting further moving of the goalposts than"moviegames are anything I don't like" you already did.
>I just don't think games should be beholden to cinematic accompaniment
>OH YEAH? WELL MINECRAFT HAS WORDS ON THE MENU SCREEN, HAH GOTTEM!
Why can't you argue in good faith?
I'm literally using your own moronic definition.
You're using a bastardized version of my argument as a sort of weak gotcha.
how is a quote not fair?
Why can't you argue in good faith?
Okay, then quote my exact argument.
>If even one person, JUST ONE, is willing to ackowledge gameplay as important enough to discard everything else, then the game can be considered decent at the leas
It literally says person.
Unless you don't consider yourself a person, which would be fair enough
I already told you that was a typo on my end, but you know what? Considering what your average "person" is like, maybe I don't want to be one. In a society of NPCs, maybe being unpersoned wouldn't be a bad thing. People don't know what's good for them, and considering how much they just want visual novels with waifus in them, and how they mindlessly consume without question, maybe we need to rethink the value of a "person".
That's just me though.
A typo would be perspn, you are just trying to move the goalposts.
We can reevaluate it, yours would be literally zero 😉
When the gameplay outright ends and I am put in story mode for awhile, that is forgivable.
When the gameplay "fails" to give me options that have no intuitive reason to exist, like killing random NPCs, that isn't even in need of forgiveness.
When the gameplay takes away options that intuitively should exist in the service of one specific playstyle that the developers want to promote despite no evidence in its favor, that is a problem.
If your game has me walking around in a 3D space and I can't even get on top of a knee high ledge, then it had better be a damn clever game because it's fighting an uphill battle. (2D games can do whatever they want with their hypothetical perspective-based Z axis. Presenting one-way paths as ledges you can hop down but not climb up, to make a classic example, is totally fine.)
So yes, in the end it does require a degree of intuition. My point is that when there is a hard line between the parts you control and the parts you don't, that's fine. But this invisible hand bullshit telling you not to do things that are perfectly reasonable and in line with the game's mechanics as presented doesn't fly.
>I don't think Nintendo wanted to tell a story about a 40 foot tall robot with a penis that spews fire onto a torture stake covered in koroks. Didn't stop people from doing it anyway.
That's the gameplay aspect. It's not the story Nintendo is telling. That's (YOU)r gameplay.
>Their reasoning is pretty poor, to be honest.
Doesn't matter their reasoning. It's their game.
>So the gameplay means nothing.
Without the other elements of the game, yes 100% correct. Otherwise I'd play minecraft or ToTK. It gives me a reason to explore their world.
>But you said devs don't listen to the fans.
Never said that. Saying the Devs didn't listen to (YOU) specifically doesn't mean they don't listen to the overwhelming fan opinion.
>fan
You didn't say fan, why are you backpeddling?
You said "If even one person, JUST ONE, is willing to ackowledge gameplay as important enough to discard everything else", so you saying that counts.
Unless you aren't considered a person, which would make sense.
>It's all about everything coming together. you see things only as separate pieces, where I look at it all as a whole. Everything should work in tandem, not get in the way.
You literally said the only difference between moviegames and non-moviegames is if you feel like it, the game could be 100 percent just a movie and you would still consider it okay.
>It's a shit take to value gameplay above else?
Your take isn't valuing gameplay above else.
Your take is that story shouldn't exist in a videogame, and even if the total cutscene time is 1% of the total play time, you're still arguing it should be removed. This is absolutely a shit take.
>That's why I made this thread infact, to actually have a DISCUSSION about the GAMEPLAY
And nobody is discussing gameplay, they're too busy discussing why you're a moron demanding 1% of the game to be removed. I've had far more discussion threads on Ganker about ToTK, talking about the actual gameplay, pic related, making zoanite builds.
>And if the gameplay isn't the primary motivation, then it should be criticized as such.
So not ToTK/BoTW. Where gameplay obviously takes the largest focus.
>That's because Wind Waker has a ton of problems, and the story is just a bandaid ontop of a festering wound.
WW is one of the best 3D Zeldas.
>I'm the kind of guy that can be entertained by flash games on newgrounds,
and you're also the kind of guy that has zero influence on videogame development, thank the fricking gods.
>then again, you shouldn't mind me wanting to get rid of the cutscenes.
I don't, because it's your opinion, but it's the wrong opinion to have, and quite frankly a shit take.
>They are not even 1% of the game, by your own admission
So why b***h so much they're there? It's not there for (You), it's there for the tens of millions of people who actually want them. Again, you're not the MC.
>If I was to be so bold, that's what video games are. They can be fun and interactive, but let's not pretend that they're some profound artform.
They can be an artform, and it's up for the person making the game to decide how they want it to be. Artists choose all sorts of medium for their art. Be it film, books, videogames, paintings. If you want to decide what's in a game, make one.
>Except that you're not even looking at his face most of the time. You could remove that and the game wouldn't suffer for it much.
Windwaker would be a garbage boring game without the story/links expression. The only reason gathering the triforce is worth it is for the payoff in it.
> I don't think I cared one bit about why, I just wanted to fight the evil magic pig in the final dungeon.
I wish I could give as little of a shit as you about it. If I could just care about fighting evil magic pigs I could be easily entertained by garbage 5 dollar indie games littering the steam list.
None of those arguments matter, because you said in
that the label moviegame isn't in ny way related to the game itself.
>Why not? Seems silly to be beholden to a cinematic story for no reason.
I just gave you the reason. Use some common sense.
>I have no problem with books or movies (unless they're braindead marvel slop) but don't try shoving them into an interactive medium.
Except you do, because you have an autistic fit in it being included in videogames. Let me guess, you can't eat a hamburger too, because you can't have other foods touch each other lmfao.
>Until it curbs your freedom for the sake of the story.
Nope, it's interactive still. The game is interactive, and in order for you to get any of those cutscenes you need to interact with the game in the first place. They're interactive the entire way through.
>then again, why can't I kill every Zelda NPC?
Just because you cannot kill every NPC in Zelda doesn't mean it suddenly isn't interactive. Again not a real argument.
>There shouldn't be any story based limitations
Then you're moronic. Simple as. It's a Nintendo game.
>I can't stand 45 seconds of cutscenes.
No you can't stand 45 minutes of any written content. This is blatantly obvious.
>A book does not sell itself as an interactive medium.
A game with cutscenes is still interactive. BoTW, and ToTK are interactive. That isn't an actual argument.
>The equivalent would be a choose-your-own-adventure book, but all the choices are the same and there's only one ending.
Not even close moron.
So again, go play Tetris, the king of gameplay videogames, and off yourself you ADHD disappointment.
>So you CAN kill NPCs. So why can't you kill the rest?
No, you don't kill them. Sorry, but if you can't derive the answer on your own as to why you can't murder NPCs in a Nintendo game, then you're clinically moronic.
Why are the wood chopping cutscene in terraria so important?
You can't stand 45 minutes of cutscenes. You've said that yourself, spread across 100+ hours of gameplay.
Fourty-Five minutes. This alone means you don't have the attention span to read books, most likely have dyslexia, and even worse, 45 minutes would make you unable to finish any movie that's worth a damn watching.
So again, go play Tetris, the king of gameplay videogames, and off yourself you ADHD disappointment.
then trimming the fat wont save it either if its been in dumpster juice
It's a start. You slowly fix the problems. The dumpster juice in particular will be the next thing to go. You should always be striving to fix a problem, not be stagnant.
theres no fixing meat if its been in dumpster juice brudda
You accept hours of cutscenes in teraria
Like the wood chopping cutscene in terraria
fat is flavor
Go exclusively play Tetris.
It's the greatest game released, it's 100% gameplay, and it's more your lane.
I get you've got ADHD, Dyslexia, and are too moronic to enjoy a good story, but that doesn't make you the voice of gaming.
So once again, go exclusively play Tetris, and KYS.
see
>Sakon the thief
One game made by an alternate developer, and killing Sakon is an accidental action since you lose the bomb bag.
>Also you could technically attack NPCs like the gerudo
Botw/totk has yiga clan. So that puts that silly argument to rest.
> About 7 years ago ...
> It seems like your argument is that A) Things change and that's ok and B) That the change is good because people enjoyed the game. Regarding issue A) I have no problem with things changing but at a certain point you get into something similar to but not exactly the same as the ship of Theseus problem, and the issue I'm referring to is at what point does something change so dramatically that it no longer fundamentally is itself anymore? What if you remove Link from the game? The Triforce? Hyrule? Rupees? The Master Sword? At a certain point there is too much degradation. You need to look at the thread of similarity that has been a chain going back to the first Zelda game and you will find that what is unbroken in this chain is basically "Zelda". Nintendo may be legally able to do as they please with their product, but the degradation of the fundamental aspects of what defines the series does matter in a non-legal, linguistic, sense. So I'm not against change and obviously Nintendo can legally do as they please, and change can be a good thing, but too much change and it can degrade the definition of what Zelda itself even means. TOTK/BOTW fundamentally retconned the whole plot of Zelda, which I think is an abomination, and there was no actual Triforce in this game instead they used sacred stones, and it changes too much about the plot, it doesn't slightly chip at it, it amputates a lot of important plot just to reskin the game in a cheap way. On point B) Just because people enjoyed something doesn't means it's an improvement. If a milk bottling company replaced milk with Coca Cola yes, I'm sure a lot of stupid people would find it to be preferable to milk, but it's not "milk", it's cola. Just because people like these newer games doesn't make them good ZELDA games.
>and the issue I'm referring to is at what point does something change so dramatically that it no longer fundamentally is itself anymore? What if you remove Link from the game? The Triforce? Hyrule? Rupees? The Master Sword?
Honestly, you could remove all of these things. Majora's Mask didn't have the master sword, hell even Zelda 1 didn't introduce the concept. You got a regular sword and a white sword, neither of which were the iconic weapon of legend. You don't need hyrule either. Link himself can be easy changed to fit any number of profiles, as his changing looks have shown in past years. Many games even let you rename Link. So if you wanted you could fight the dark lord Ganon as =JoseSanchez2007=. It just wasn't that important when you had a solid GAMEPLAY structure underneath. Look at BOTW and TOTK in comparison, look at how much they gutted and shredded what we would consider series fundamentals, and yet many will argue in their defense as good installments. Even the triforce was reduced to just some trinket that doesn't matter, and yet IMO it doesn't cause detriment to the game. So really, what shouldn't be on the table to change?
>Just because people enjoyed something doesn't means it's an improvement
Oh, trust me. I won't be one to use ad populum as if it was a pillar of my argument, just that there are people who will quite gladly argue in defense of these new changes, and far be it from me to shame them when they make agreeable points.
>If a milk bottling company replaced milk with Coca Cola yes, I'm sure a lot of stupid people would find it to be preferable to milk,
Maybe they wanted to change their business to also sell cola. They should be allowed to, as long as they still sell milk. I think you're worried about milk being replaced by soda, which is a valid concern, but if both can exist in harmony, why not have both?
Going back to your first point, maybe Zelda does operate on a ship of thesseus rule. If you have some element of the old game, then you're free to change others. You need a strong foundation, aka the boat should actually function, but other than that why not take a few creative liberties?
>Zelda 2 was a sidescroller
>LTTP introduced more rigid structure
>OOT made the leap into 3D and introduced time travel
>TP introduced the twilight realm
>wind Waker introduced sailing
>The Oracle games tried their hand at linkable games
>BOTW went full open world
>You're partially right. It's all of them combined, so it should take lessons from each.
It has aspects of them, but it's fundamentally an adventure game. I've already explained that the unbroken chain of things that have NOT changed going all the way back to the first NES Zelda game, and the general repeating patterns and themes, that is essentially what defines Zelda. Cinematic storytelling doesn't degrade any of this and can only add to it so I don't understand what you are even complaining about. On the one hand you seem very pro-change yet you are complaining about what you perceive to be an increase in cinematic storytelling. I don't really even understand what you are complaining about you seem to either be holding views that are incoherent or I'm not talking to the same anon here.
> you should adapt it for the better.
I suppose that if they value making money, you are correct, since people are buying this product. But I don't think it means they are producing a better Zelda product, as it was once defined. Let me give you an example of what I'm talking about. Let's say someone built a boat that everyone liked but then they, by whatever means, added wings, etc. to it and turned it into an airplane. It may increase the overall value of the product because now it can fly, but it no longer functions as a boat, so it's a worse boat. The people who liked the boat no longer have a boat, which sucks. Just because people like the new Zelda games only reflects that people like these games, not that they are good ZELDA games. In 5 years they could make a street fighter style fighting game based on Zelda that far surpasses TOTK or BOTW in sales, it doesn't mean it's a good thing for the series, because now it's a fighting game series, which isn't what the originals fans expect or want.
>I've already explained that the unbroken chain of things that have NOT changed going all the way back to the first NES Zelda game, and the general repeating patterns and themes, that is essentially what defines Zelda.
And as I explain right above your post, these themes can change on a whim. What is absolutely vital in a Zelda game? The master sword? Princess Zelda? hyrule? all of them are disposable. Link himself is exchangeable. He doesn't even need blond hair or his name. He can be a pink haired fairy boy named LongDong1997, and the game will acknowledge him as such.
>Cinematic storytelling doesn't degrade any of this and can only add to it
I must disagree because cinematics have always been a way to skip having gameplay. JRPGs in particular will use them alot to show off fights that they're too lazy to turn into actual game segments.
>Let's say someone built a boat that everyone liked but then they, by whatever means, added wings, etc. to it and turned it into an airplane. It may increase the overall value of the product because now it can fly, but it no longer functions as a boat, so it's a worse boat. The people who liked the boat no longer have a boat
What you consider to be a boat has, in the past, been a car, a train and at one point even a convertible. The series is more flexible than people give it credit for. Should Zelda 2 be shamed for being the only sidescroller? Should Wind Waker be shamed for taking place on an ocean? Should every game past Zelda 1 be shamed for taking place in 3D? Traditional conventions exist to be broken, as long as you can justify it.
>but this is just not ZELDA.
It is a big departure, but since the series is guaranteed to make money, Nintendo has been given a golden ticket to experiment and try new things. This isn't a Metroid situation where one wrong move can tank the series. Zelda is Nintendo's golden child, and it actually has flexibility.
>It is a big departure, but since the series is guaranteed to make money, Nintendo has been given a golden ticket to experiment and try new things. This isn't a Metroid situation where one wrong move can tank the series. Zelda is Nintendo's golden child, and it actually has flexibility
Zelda was almost a dead franchise after skyward tho
It still sold, enough for them to re-release pretty much every game prior. Consider that Wind Waker, Twilight Princess and Skyward Sword all got HD remasters and remakes. Compare that to Metroid, that was so badly burned that Metroid: Other M has been permanently buried on the Wii and left to rot. Sakamoto will keep trying to shove in references in Smash (with blessing from Sakurai) but the gameplay enthusiasts aren't having any of this trash that's written like fanfiction. Meanwhile, begrudgingly I must say that the Zeldas all have something to bring to the table. Even Skyward was intriguing in introducing crafting elements, a sky world, and motion controls, compared to Twilight Princess kinda half-assing the idea. They're not very good games compared to the classics, but I see their appeal, much like how one can see the appeal in BOTW or TOTK. The Switch just happened to skyrocket the series back into the spotlight with a game that took a big risk. Looks like it paid off.
>It appears the majority do indeed want to be an aimless person just beating things up without rhyme or reason.
That's really cool and I have absolutely zero issues with that and think Nintendo should make that game but this is just not ZELDA.
Sounds like GTA is a more suitable game for him.
>"you can't kill NPCs"
>zelda game
moron.
>>can't kill NPCs because you HAVE to be the hero
to torture the koroks all you want, they never actually die
how tf is that a flaw? FromSoft games and their legacy are a mistake
I mean it makes every single little thing cinematic. The sign guy, the long "look at what you unlocked" cut scenes, mandatory text boxes with no practical way of skipping, teleporting animations, beginning and end of shrines, etc.
It'd a skinner bod game, it really should just embrace it instead of pretending there is intrigue in such a empty vapid world
Have you never played a zelda game?
moron
Yeah this is actual bait.
Yes, it's a homosexual containment thread
>at least 5 threads up talking about Zelda's ass or wanting to frick the goat people
>everyone in the threads says "WE DON'T DISCUSS GAMEPLAY HERE, GO MAKE YOUR OWN THREAD"
>proceed to do so
>they screech regardless
you''re off topic
talk about the game or leave
anyway, what do they eat
I just don't know why you can't kill NPCS in the game. Minecraft and Terraria let you do it without issue, and I always pinned Nintendo as a company that didn't care about story or plot.
I think finding all the orbs for the gerudo scientist was the best quest in the game
Haing to find coordinnates with the sea dog was so cool
I don’t. That shit was tedious as frick.
What I loved most is that you finally know more about the 7 warriors of the past and the eight one, and why it's so far from the others.
Also Gerudo desert have among the most best caves in the game
That was one of my favorite side quest.
Filtered. Shit was easy as frick.
No. The monster control quest were kino.
>not gameplay
Terraria is a moviegame confirmed.
>just talked about Terraria's gameplay right above your post
Better luck next time.
Killing NPCs is a cutscene, not gameplay.
[citation needed]
>animation plays
>needs to skill
I accept your concession.
it's a bad faith shitpost. OP literally says too much non-gameplay and doesn't even clarify that statement.
see
I clarify it in that post.
wrong thread, Discord troony
You'd think that. But acgay is real and insane.
Amazing.
>dumbass doesn't know to use the sort button to quickly get to proper items
Masterclass in storytelling.
It is a shame they didn’t bother to have each ancient tailor a monologue. This is probably the cheapest feeling bit of plot the game has to offer. I’d argue literally any other bit of game is better than this plot beats execution.
i wish the champions actually traveled with you instead of blue things
they have duties to take care of
they should drop everything and help me save the world from the anti-christ
There's a mod for that. Personally I'm holding off on modding until at least master mode is announced.
>Whoa I think Zelda is becoming too much like a movie game
?????????
Is this bait? Do you find OoT, MM, TP and SS literally unplayable then?
I couldn't even get through TP because it was railroady garbage with cutscenes everywhere. In a way, it was good that BOTW and TOTK helped cleanse the series of endless OOT rehashes, but they honestly didn't go far enough, which is the real issue.
Being super generous, BOTW and TOTK are about a 6/10 in terms of quality, still actually good games, but they are held back by archaic game design that are holdovers from older Zelda titles that they refuse to let go of.
I don't get your angle. Are you trying to be funny?
>I don't get your angle. Are you trying to be funny?
It's the truth.
No risk of losing, no skill needed, just watch the animation.
The definition of a cutscene, and thus a moviegame.
You might be an actual ADHD autist, never mind then.
i think they showed great promise with their directorial decisions in this game, actually kino and fantastically shot scenes, very impressed
it makes me want a more linear, story focused, game from the same team
I wouldn't really expect much from Monolith Soft. They're best known for Xenoblade, a series more cinematic than TLOU. Xenoblade X had potential with the whole "travel the world with cool robots" angle, but alas that was not to be with the subpar combat.
>No risk of losing, no skill needed,
Funfact: cutting down certain trees can result in them dropping bombs, which kill you in one shot in the early game. guess it's not a cutscene after all.
So a cutscene with a possilbe low chance of a quick time even.
Moviegame.
I have to admire you for trying so hard, even if you're not making progress.
I don't know why you guys even want story in video games. This isn't a visual novel, it's supposed to be an interactive product. Watching a cutscene isn't interactive.
I like it
There are people who like TLOU's story, that doesn't magically make it good.
sure
>I have to admire you for trying so hard, even if you're not making progress.
Why are you pretending you didn't used to hate all cutscenes, but changed to worship sony?
>Watching a cutscene isn't interactive.
Yeah, like Terraria has, which makes it a moviegame.
>it makes me want a more linear, story focused, game from the same team
frick no, we finally got rid of it
well maybe just get rid of memories then, i think he holds the storytelling aspect of the game back a bit
I think they're fine, we have both more past and present story bits than in any other zelda games now
thats true, but the story pacing and direction of OOT is still superior, even though i prefer TOTK as a game
because story is good
>because story is good
Sorry anon, but story has never been good, and games have always been improved when the story is taken out. This is the same apologist attitude that games like Gone Home tried to push, so they could sell a 2 hour walking simulator.
>but changed to worship sony?
?
>so they could sell a 2 hour walking simulator.
instead you worship games made of two our of block removal cutscenes.
dude how are you still going on about this shit, its been like 3 weeks and you are still crying about story in games, basically every game ever made has a story, it gives the player something to emotionally get involved with
the pacing and tone are near perfect in OOT, and i LOVE TOTK's story more than OOT, but i think OOT's story presentation is more cohesive
weeks? try years
Haven't played OOT for a while, think I'll replay it but I highly doubt it can be superior with how old it is
it was a good one too, I also like what they did with Lurelin village in this game, it was criminally underused in BotW
I think the leadups to dungeons can hit that sweet spot. Self-contained regions with their own conflicts and resolutions is a simple way to do things, and you can fit in all the linear cinematic shit you want in there without too much fuss about how it fits into the world as a whole. That said, there's always room for evolution, like seeing more Gorons travelling out of Death Mountain once you solve their drug epidemic, allowing them to feature in the conflicts of other regions. It's a small thing to mildly influence the linear segments, but goes a long way into breathing dynamic life into the world.
An open overworld half the size of botw/totk with the dungeons of tp/oot would be the perfect zelda game.
Stop replying to AC gay you fricking morons. Did you really think anyone else would complain about the AMOUNT of story in this game?
Why not complain about the amount? Any amount is, by definition, too much, and the game would be improved by lessening it.
best shrine in the game
Wrong, moron. For example, better and more complete writing is one of the reasons why link to the past is a better game than the NES titles. Not to say that a game can't have too much story, that a developer can't have incorrect priorities in regards to story and its relationship to the actual game (looking at you, Hideo Kojima), but this is a giant ass sandbox where the story is deliberately UNDERwritten in order to facilitate the sandbox game design. One of the major complaints about BOTW and especially TOTK is that the games actually do a very poor job of establishing narrative stakes, something that could have been fixed by putting more effort into the writing and world building.
NOBODY but you wants a game that doesn't have narrative context.
>NOBODY but you wants a game that doesn't have narrative context.
There is nothing with having a context bereft of narrative. All it means that you're allowed to "make your own fun". Isn't that the defense of many of TOTK's shortcomings, that players should find a way to make the game fun? It's why you're not supposed to cheese shrines, why you're supposed to make wacky meme contraptions to carry koroks around, why you're not supposed to cheese enemies and bosses. You're supposed to intentionally find your own way of having fun. Well, why can't the story fall under the same jurisdiction? This is the lifeblood of 4X and grand strategy games, if you've ever played them. The plot and lore of the world mean nothing, since you can just become an evil dictator and sat bombs every planet and razes every city and village in your path. It may not be lore friendly, but it's FUN. You know, that thing that's basically a cross-shaped piece of garlic to the vampire that is Neil Druckmann.
The people who say they can't have fun in a world bereft of narrative are the poor souls who can't have fun playing Tetris or Pac Man, or who berate Mario for not having as much story as God of War or Uncharted. They think just having fun platforming is too videogamey. It needs a narrative and Mario needs to break down and cry about his tragic past. I disagree with the notion.
>They think just having fun platforming is too videogamey. It needs a narrative and Mario needs to break down and cry about his tragic past. I disagree with the notion.
You cried
so your opinion is worthless.
>There is nothing with having a context bereft of narrative.
It's called pathos, you literal fricking moron. People don't want to just "make their own fun", they want to experience something they couldn't or at least didn't think of themselves. They want to be surprised, they want to be thrilled, they want to be scared, they want to feel like they've accomplished something other than making a number go up, even if it's really just an illusion. You are literally asking why fiction exists at all, and people don't all just play sports instead. And the answer to that question is that not everyone shares your tastes, not everyone is a psychopath.
>or who berate Mario for not having as much story as God of War or Uncharted
Literally nobody does this. You have entirely invented this imaginary war between people who think that all games should be movie games and people who think games just shouldn't have story at all. One group doesn't exist at all and the other is literally just yourself.
>to any gameplay enthusiast it's concerning.
you sound like such a homosexual
What the frick are you talking about? There wasn't enough cutscenes in the game and the narrative was shit.
OP is an infamous schizophrenic moron who thinks that metroid prime, a game with literally no spoken dialogue, has too much story. He literally thinks that games should have absolutely no narrative context at all, like asteroids and breakout.
That said, TOTK has like 3 hours of cutscenes, the problem is that the story is lazy and the dialogue is cringe worthy.
riju!
By "cinematic game design" are you talking about the handful of incredibly superficial cut scenes in the game? The "tears" were pretty much exactly the same as the "memories" from BOTW so nothing has really changed. If you are saying what I think you are saying, I feel completely the opposite. This game spent almost no effort in working on it's story or characters which in turn fortify the cinematic elements. Those elements were done so lazily that it's kind of incredible. I agree that if the plot was going to be this piss poor they probably shouldn't have even had a plot to begin with, if that's what you are saying. The story and character development was ridiculously superficial. Ganons motivation was completely unexplained, the heroes you fight with (the rito, the goron, etc..) are barely fleshed out just the absolute minimum, they couldn't even be bothered with putting unique characters in each tent spread out across the map, they literally re-used the same individuals, the beetle guy, the flying reporter bird-man, the same stable guy. The cinematic parts would have been great if the story was more like Majora's Mask or Link's Awakening or even Ocarina of Time, there's nothing original or interesting about this game. It's literally repetitive scattered garbage across a huge map. Not only is the plot piss-poor, which means piss-poor cinematic content but it actually retcons previous games which is completely inexplicable. This game seems to want the player to either be too young to notice or too focused on the vehicle, weapon, object building and fighting (gameplay) mechanics to care about these shortcomings.
see
The amount of cutscenes isn't the primary issue.
>dude how are you still going on about this shit, its been like 3 weeks and you are still crying about story in games,
3 weeks? I've been hating story in games for THIRTEEN YEARS. It nearly murdered one of my favorite franchises, should I sit idly by and watch it kill everything else?
Anon, pardon me, but I was mocking people who cried about kaizo games being unfairly hard. That's the whole point of the genre.
>It nearly murdered one of my favorite franchises, should I sit idly by and watch it kill everything else?
your crying on Ganker is not going to make a difference, so yes, you are wasting your time
most people love the stories in these games
>your crying on Ganker is not going to make a difference,
If I can educate even one person on the importance of this issue, then it's worth the effort.
it is not, i am sorry
you would be better off making your own game with zero story
>That's the whole point of the genre.
Hmm, there are genres where the story is important, yet you have never accepted that.
Why are you such a hypocrite moviegame lover?
>Hmm, there are genres where the story is important, yet you have never accepted that.
When the point of the genre is not offering a gameplay experience, then I can criticize it for being shit. It's like me going to a restaurant and giving a 1 star review to a plate of food that has no nutritional value and no flavor, and exists just to be "art". It really depends on how much you can justify the validity of the genre.
again the point is to educate. If the gameplay has good gameplay, then you shouldn't want or need cinematics as a crutch, and you should have no problem with getting rid of them.
>They want to be surprised, they want to be thrilled, they want to be scared, they want to feel like they've accomplished something other than making a number go up,
And guess what? You don't need a story for that. When playing a game like Minecraft, you can experience all of these feelings.
>the thrill of barely escaping a creeper explosion
>the fear of looking down and seeing a darkened abyss when you enter a cave
>the accomplishment of creating a living, thriving base that suits all of your needs
Do you need a "story" to pat you on the back, instead of just having the intrinsic reward of knowing that you survive and created something?
>Literally nobody does this.
The entirety of games journalism will beg to differ. They'll talk about how much they love Nintendo games, but behind Nintendo's back they'll also talk about how Mario needs to tackle social norms and current year events, and don't get me started on those articles about how Zelda represents gender politics. Blegh. When you let them in, they take a mile and ruin everything. Look at what happened to Skullgirls if you don't believe me.
you have extreme autism, 99% of the game is gameplay, it is a non issue
Then it would be a non issue to get rid of the non-gameplay. Seems like an open and shut case.
It's not genuine gameplay discussion if you're calling people homosexuals and trannies.
>Then it would be a non issue to get rid of the non-gameplay.
like the block hitting cutscenes in terraria, agreed.
no because they are a net positive
They're actively preventing gameplay interaction from happening, so I disagree. If cutscenes were a net positive, then companies like sony would be making masterpieces left and right. Who cares if the gameplay in their games is shit, they have "artistic integrity" right? And since we've established that cutscenes can replace gameplay without hampering the game, then they must be good, right?
Certainly this isn't an affront to the very concept of interactivity?
you are so autistic how do you garner the energy for this shit all day
>They're actively preventing gameplay interaction from happening
like the wood chopping in terraria.
Why do you always move the goalposts to protect troonyraria?
>It's not genuine gameplay discussion if you're calling people homosexuals and trannies.
Insults aren't gameplay, complaining about them means terraria is a moviegame.
>It really depends on how much you can justify the validity of the genre.
So kaizo is worthless dogshit for trannies, I accept your concession.
>When playing a game like Minecraft, you can experience all of these feelings.
No you can't. Minecraft has no characters, no setting, no win condition, and no long term fail state. It's a good game, it's not narratively compelling. Not that minecraft should aim for that, the point is principally to be a creativity tool after all.
>Do you need a "story" to pat you on the back,
Yes, you fricking autist. A game with a good story is infinitely more compelling than one that lacks it. Do you think a game like Furi would be as beloved if it was just 9 boss fights back to back with no dialogue? Of course not.
>but behind Nintendo's back they'll also talk about how Mario needs to tackle social norms and current year events,
Literal schizophrenia.
>The amount of cutscenes isn't the primary issue.
So what is the issue? You don't want there to be any plot? Just the main protag running around collecting shit and attacking people? Isn't that basically what TOTK is?
This is the actual ACgay, in case anyone couldn't tell.
Pic related is peak zelda game
Man, the leadup quests to the Water Temple were fricking great. Then we get to the Water Temple.
A shame it sucks, has some good ideas but it's literally 4 small islands with cool puzzles and that's it lmoa
>posting the actual dungeon of the Zora region
Based. And really there was just one puzzle, being the flood gate ones. I did like the crackhead lighthouse one though, but you can do that pretty simply by spamming arrows. The boss is honestly a top 3 Zelda boss however. I find it funny since the reception of that boss seems to be divisive.
>since the reception of that boss seems to be divisive.
Its design is... something and the boss music isn't really memorable compared to the others.
>Its design is.
Idk, i liked that something that pitiful becomes a mud shark.
>mudsharks are evil and should be killed
based nintendo
Mucktorock reminded me of the poe boss from wind waker and the monkey from twilight princess with it's animated movement.
that's the thing, zora questline in totk is actually the most dungeon content you get in the game
water temple on its own isn't great but its ALSO the zora waterworks, so you're getting two nu-dungeons, as opposed to every other questline that just has one. And they're all about the same size, so its basically 2-1-1-1-1 dungeons per questline
at least gerudo once again has something interesting with the town siege and its dungeon was okay, but jesus did ritos get shafted AGAIN just like botw
>show up to rito village
>talk to NPC
>go shoot a few targets at range
>mediocre wind temple
>mediocre wind boss
....
>go to rito village
>talk to NPC
>go find NPC in mountain
>kill a single 1 hp enemy
>climb a linear series of platforms
>mediocre wind temple
>awful wind boss
lmfao but they're both shitty
zora waterworks is garbo
Rito platforming sequence is great the frick are you smoking
literally just a series of fricking immobile platforms
have you ever played a mario game?
they didn't even TRY with the rito quest
>every single island is immobile
>the most dynamic elements are some spring-boats and a single frozen pool you need to crack
>that's it
They didn't even try with rotating platforms, obstacles/hazards, icy ground, etc. Its just literal jump from platform to platform in a completely barren course except oh we've got like 8 enemies sprinkled in it
even the zora ascent had the water bubble stuff AND low gravity
Theyre not immobile you have small flying ships moving and enemies to give some challenge
Oddly enough getting to the temples was actually far more enjoyable than the temples themselves, I mean the temples were okay but the approach to the Wind temple was fricking incredible, the quests for the water temple and Lightning temples were really good, the fire temple one is just meh
>the fire temple one is just meh
I think the fire temple is the example where the actual dungeon is better than getting to it even if diving into the unnderground
from death mountain was pure KINO
>actual dungeon is better
Aiming Yunobo in the minecarts was pure jank ludo fun.
I love how you can climb almost everywhere in the dungeon, I'm sure it's the most ""breakable" one among the four.
Fire and Water temple have the best music imo. Fire temple might require some odd tastes to enjoy though. Fire temple was such a fine ride, minecarts going every which way and looping with enemy carts too, something which is missing from the more prominent minecart games. The Water temple should have been just as wacky with its inter-puzzle traversal. The place was low grav, the temple should have been 4 times as big with gravbubbles and waterfalls accounting for the majority of the horizontal and vertical traversal. That alone would have cemented the Zora region as king for 2 games in a row.
It was nice finally seeing mine carts used in a 3D zelda when they were only in top down zeldas.
Think about how many gameplay systems this brought in, dummy, all the physics and synergy shit, just calm down
Or maybe this is an ACgay-bait thread and I should ignore
as long as the game is good, who the frick cares if it uses "cinematics"?
I don't mind the amount of cutscenes but the writing was just bad/boring. The decision to make the plot take place in the past again with out of order memories was shit. BotW did it better since finding the locations was subtle and the memories were nonessential bonuses. In TotK you have big glowing hieroglyphs and you can ruin the twist very easily.
I wish Link was transported with Zelda to the past so I could explore old Hyrule, play with Zelda as a companion, and talk to Rauru myself. Frick these "memories". Why can't these events actually happen instead of being loredumped on me?
Its been nearly a decade, why do people still respond to ACgay?
In all fields
give me a QRD on ACgay
he's a megagay
I only reply so he bumps the thread, i don't even read what he posts
I thoroughly enjoy having gameplay discussions with genuine anons knowing that he's ignoring them all in his pathetic hypocrisy.
At this point does it make any difference? There have been so many BotW/TotK bait threads that they all blend with each other because they all have the same moronic arguments.
He’ll samegay and start responding to himself with shitty arguments if people ignore him, its an unfortunate problem with schizos is you cant ignore them, Barry and Eric are other examples of samegayging schizos, also newbies dont sage which is why he gets even more attention
Unlike either of those people, ACgay exists
Theres been about 8 years of evidence for Barry and 5 for eric since they both doxxed themselves
Eric=schizo that hates Nintendo
Barry=schizo that hates every SE property that is better than FFXV, which is most of them
If Barry also hated FFXV, then maybe I'd sympathize with him more. That dumpster fire isn't fit to lick the shit off of Metroid: Other M's boots. That's how bad it is.
oh so eric isnt the guy that calls everybody eric?
Funnily enough he tried that too because people caught his posting style instantly, I dont even use this board often which sums up how much all of them spam
Appearently the homosexual who keeps replying eric to everyone is called darren and doxxed himself as well. These gays replying with scapegoats everywhere are annoying as shit though.
literally have no idea who eric is
>slap it onto your shitty vehicle
>it just werks
This fricker is my favorite device. I ALWAYS make sure it faces the camera in my builds.
Where do you get these bad boys?
>and to any gameplay enthusiast
You should go play tetris, exclusively tetris, and go have a nice day
"I didn't play the game" The post.
What the frick are you talking about? These games barely have any plot and 99% of them is gameplay same for most Nintendo stuff, franchises like Mario, Metroid and Splatoon have the thinnest veneer of a plot, only the RPGs like Xenoblade go the other way, if anything Nintendo has been drifting away from the cinematic-heavy style of game, they used to do that far more in the time of the GameCube and the Wii.
see
Stop getting angry at me for wanting to get rid of the non-gameplay then. You say it yourself,. the games are 99% gameplay, so what's the harm in gutting a few cutscenes here and there? You act like they're the glue keeping the whole game from falling apart, which indicates that the games aren't that good.
>Minecraft has no characters
Good
>no setting
Not my problem
>no win condition
Survival and killing the ender dragon seems good enough to me.
>and no long term fail state.
Hardcore mode states otherwise.
>A game with a good story is infinitely more compelling than one that lacks it.
And what's considered a good story? One where you get parked infront of a cutscene for an hour and have a waifu cry about her feelings? And then you fight the main bad guy with love and friendship? And then the inevitable "press x to le save the earth" victory lap at the end? Where's the challenge in that? The game's basically playing itself at that point.
>Literal schizophrenia.
Do I have to start linking to the articles? I'd rather not, but if you need proof...
Exclusively play tetris and go have a nice day.
Reminder that only newbies and shitskins reply to acgay.
whole game is great, i only got bored after 300+ hours
/thread
>TP and SS both have the most atrocious openings that are mostly just cutscenes and take way longer than either BOTW or TOTK
ok lads, give it to me straight
I love many of the Zelda games, with MM, OoT, WW, OoS, and LttP being my favs
I did not like Skyward Sword or Twilight Princess
Should I play BotW, ToTK, both, or neither?
Botw/totk isn't similar to any of those games. Play it if you like typical open world shit.
BotW then totk
DONT skip BotW like most morons would tell you
Beware tho, both games can be rather long to beat
yes they are the best in the series, if you play BOTW just do main story then enjoy TOTK
If you do play them both, they may seem similar at first, and once you beat BotW I'd take a short break before TotK to best experience it.
Finished BotW's Master Mode in March as an appetiser, and the time frame of 2 months really helped highlight the familiars and the differences once TotK came around.
>he didnt like her cutscene
It saddens me that all of TotK great moments didn't have that much impact because of the narrative structure.
GIVE ME A QRD ON ACgay WHY IS HE CALLED ACgay AND WHAT IS HIS LORE
>game about flying through the skies
>game that lets you build vehicles
>....
>only a single new flying enemy and its never seen in the skies
>no enemies in all the skies anywhere
>has never encountered the flying gleoks
they don't fly in the sky
they only fly close to the ground in a set area, mostly in isolated arenas
the ONLY enemies found somewhere in the sky divorced from land are some aerocludas, mostly between the ground and platforms in the sky around death mountain, just there to interrupt your flight to them
not that it matters, because aerocluda literally die when they try to hit link on a vehicle
I've fricked around for about 30 hours and i'm just burnt.
Map is way to similar, side quests are still a joke (why is it so hard to make good quests, Nintendo showed that they can make well written shit in Majoras Mask), the depths while cool when you first go there, the hype is killed when you realize it's literally an area to farm battery cells. Sky islands are my personal favorite shit, just cool puzzles and a nice change of pace but there's barely any.
Gleeoks are cool, but i'm just burnt out from this shit map. I just wish Nintendo at least did something like swap the regions around (some fricking environmental shift, can easily be explained with "muh magic") but nope, Hateno is still in the same area, Kakariko is past dueling peaks, Zoras Domain is nearby.
Frick that. I've already travelled this exact path in BoTW
I knew this would happen so I purposefully didn't replay botw for 6 years. It helps to forget everything.
Black person you should try the latest update for the game. It fixes literally all your issues see webm.
That's pretty cool. Does this new update still have zero load times when going to new locations?
are depths mandatory to explore? I hate that shit
There is one mandatory section, but it's short.
nice
If you're trying to get all of the outfits yes. Other than that no.
We have a button dedicated quick-swapping/dropping items, weapons, and shields, but no button for quick-swapping outfits. Did they just expect people to wear the same shit the whole game while periodically pressing + to open the menu to change Link's wardrobe?
Zelda has always had cutscenes since OOT. Go play something else.
I just finished all the main quests last night, I just have the final boss left.
Here's the problem: I got all the memories pretty early, maybe 2 dungeons in. I got the Master Sword before that because I went to Korok Forest, where they give you a quest for the Master Sword.
So for like 70% of my playtime I knew the entire story and that it OBVIOUSLY wasn't Zelda. Of course Link doesn't mention this at all, but Purah even has dialogue for if you did this already.
I also found the fifth sage before I went to Gerudo Town. The whole game I was wondering wtf was up with the ring ruins, which you visit early on. So by the time I got the quest for it, I already did all that shit - it was a tedious mini quest that I didn't really need to do but I was waiting the whole game for.
Purah also has dialogue for this and calls Link a moron.
The open world design is cool, but for fricks sake they could have just locked at least some things behind story progression, instead of the end stuff at Hyrule Castle which takes 30 mins (only because there is some bizarre padding where Zelda teleports around for no reason).
Add in the annoying little animations/cutscenes for everything you do (shrines, doors, cooking, fairies, NPCs moving, unskippable text in shrines etc.) and basically half the playtime just feels like nothing.
>2023
>people still reply to and take ACgay seriously
This guy feeds entirely on morons and newbies, it’s hilarious.
Anyways, go play Ghost Trick. It’s a great game and a better use of your time than this hellhole thread.
Reminder that dumping a random assortment of toys into a sandbox with no intended rules or win conditions is not a game, and if you spent money so you can play pretend, you just failed an IQ test.
Hello, I’m the Splatoon, Xenoblade, Zelda, and Terraria fan OP has been looking for.
Splatoon is good because it was a new IP at a time when Nintendo was stagnating and needed innovation. Covering the ground with ink and having it affect your movement is neat, and I also like the other ranked modes the game has.
Xenoblade is good because each of the 4 games provide a different take on a similar combat system while also providing different worlds to explore. The music is also great and the side quests help develop the nations of the world.
Zelda is good because it’s about using your tools to explore the world, and it’s very easy to lose track of time finding hidden caves or secrets.
Terraria is good because it’s a quick game to play.
I also like games like Etrian Odyssey since that one is a no frills dungeon crawler.
>ACgay thread
>296 replies
It's definitely summer.
Yeah
Hey guys just keep responding to him for another 3 hours, then you'll definitely change his mind. Its not shitting up the thread at all. Any moment now he will admit that he's an autistic moron but only if you type out another 6 paragraphs of line by line responses.
BotW and TotK are entirely gameplay, and that's what makes them soulless to me. The previous games weren't masterpieces of storytelling or anything, but they had characters and worlds that I gave a shit about
And on top of that, the gameplay is worse than before.
i now stand in awe of ACgay, i had no idea he was this powerful, i bow, i kneel before you, perhaps we should heed your wisdom
frick off already
>obvious ACgay thread
>morons take the bait. again.
this board sucks