This game was extremely boring and unimaginative. If this is the direction the series is going in, then I'm out.
Clunky vehicles and shitty physics "puzzles" (and I use the term loosely) couldn't be further from what I want from this series.
 Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14 |
 CRIME Shirt $21.68 |
Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14 |
Kek yeah. And the funny thing is, Minecraft is still a better game since you can co-op and your buildings don’t disappear after you exit the world
How the frick do you drop a series in the last entry you fricking moron
Aonuma pretty much said that all Zelda games are going to be like this going forward, so that told me right there that Zelda is dead and that it's time to find a replacement for it.
Any good Zeldalikes?
>Any good Zeldalikes?
Okami felt a lot like Zelda when I played, at least in the dungeon design philosphy, but I didn't like it personally.
Tunic does a good job at emulating the NES Zelda, but its difficulty can get bullshit at times, and I ended up dropping it for it personally.
Really liked Stsr Fox Adventures, but the game is a very rushed mess. Dinosaur Planet, if ever fully decompiled and completed by its community, is shaping up to be a hundred times better, on the N64 hardware, no less.
There's not a whole lot of games that emulated old Zelda that come to mind, so the market's got a vacuum right now, it seems. So I guess get to learning an engine and make your own, probably.
blossom tales was fun, haven't played the sequel yet but I heard that's good too
closest you can get is hacks. I've never seen a 1:1 Zelda clone.
TOTK exposed all the snoys who just want cutscene story bullshit.
>who just want cutscene story bullshit.
isn't totk's story nothing but cutscenes?
TOTK barely even has a story, and that's a good thing.
It does though. There's literally over 2 hours of cutscenes
2 hours in a 100 hour game is nothing, especially when all those cutscenes are skippable. It was actually BOTW that introduced skippable cutscenes to the series. TP has an unskippable 2 hour long intro of talking and minigames. Saying these are comparable is ridiculous.
tp has skippable cutscenes.
TP HD added it, the Wii version didn't have it. Same goes for Skyward Sword.
I played TP earlier this year, cutscene skip is on the wii version.
Most of those 100 hours are extremely repetitive. I'd say BotW and TotK each has roughly 15-20 hours of actual content.
Funnily enough, BotW probably has more content if you trim all of the fat from both games. I do not count spending tens of hours traversing from floating island to floating island or exploring a pitch black environment as real content. But I'll give exploration in BotW a pass as it was the first game that used the map and was fresh at the time.
>I don’t consider the gameplay because.. i just dont chud
Eric, this is just sad
>tens of hours traversing from floating island to floating island
What the frick? Did you actually do this? You can just use recall on debris to get on most islands.
The ones that complain most about the game have never played it. Why do you think these hate threads always use promotional art instead of gameplay in the OP.
No one has ever played a shitch "game", they play themselves.
Good of you to prove my point.
I already uninstalled this trash on my Switch. Why would I have screenshots
moron
If you had actually played the game you would know that 1) the person you're replying isn't even right and 2) even if they were, what they describe would actually be a slower way of traversing the sky islands.
OR exploring the underground. Completing both does take at least 10 hours in total. Dumbfrick.
Debris doesn't get you to even half the islands I'd estimate
TOTK is not a 100 hour game. TOTK is a 5 hour game that you redo 20 times.
With this logic every game ever is actually 1 hour long!
False
False, child
>i-its filler because i say it is chud
Again with this arbitrary logic any game can be considered an hour long
Only if the game is padded out with extremely repetitive and tedious filler. Which admittedly a lot of games are. But it certainly doesn't apply to all games. And totk is a particularly egregious example of when it does apply.
>The opening to totk is a follow Zelda cutscene followed by a 5 minute cut scene
What did the Zelda zoomer mean by this
Kh3
I initially dropped this months ago, but have been replaying it in emulator with infinite zoni charge and dupping enabled, and now it halfway playable.
What a total disappointment after the series redefining 2nd game, even 1 had more swag that this steaming turd
I'm glad this trash flopped hard, like all other bingtendo shit
How did a game with 20+ million sales flop accounts to you?
Nothing compared to what they spent on marketing
How much did they spend on marketing according to you? The first BOTW only needed 2 million to break even
False
The only "eric" is you, Darren "eric" Weathers
False, child
Tendies like you are the children, Darren "eric'' Weathers
False, child
But BG3 is a PC game
It runs better on PS5 unless you spend $4000
Shitch has no gameplay, shitch "games" are madwe for toddlers, they play themselves. Shitendo trash has always been the real moviegames, which is why tendies try so desperately to "NO U" and call anything with graphics better than an N64 a "movie game" lije spiderannm and the last of id
>It runs better on PS5 unless you spend $600
FTFY
that still doesn't run even close to PS5 due to ssd and optimization., and its' onlt onw part
False, child
Nintendo isn't a Western AAA company, they don't spend any more than they need to on marketing.
We aren’t talking about sony eric, nintendo doesnt spend gorillions on marketing
Because the latest Zelda game needs a lot of advertising, right
tehy had to spend a lot on getting a legion of shills like you to pretend to like it
kek
westoids still can't stop seething at botw even after 8 years
What makes me mad is that they could have done so many cool things with TotK given that the base was already there for them, but instead all we got was half-assed copy-pasted busy work.
Both the sky islands and depths fricking sucked.
And the lore was completed moronic.
Like you can make boats, but what's the point when there's only one small section of the map where you can use them?
A (temporarily) flooded Hyrule or would have been cool.
The Minish also would have been cool.
>made a bunch of sky islands, caves, and the Depths instead of meaningfully fleshing out BotW's existing Hyrule
>made a bunch or high-effort mechanics but overwhelmingly depended on players making their own fun with them to justify their existence
>a wide-scale asset rehash that somehow took longer than BotW
TotK might be one of the foremost examples of "high-effort laziness" I've ever seen. They got sidetracked into a ungodly amount of work expanding the game sideways just to avoid significantly building upon what was already present and ripe for elaboration from BotW.
How does adding caves to Hyrule not flesh Hyrule out? A lot of these also had unique rewards like armor sets so they were usually worth doing.
oh wow that stupid white frog thing nice
Cool.
Now i just wish they took all the stupid lego out of the game and used all that manpower and hours spent on real puzzles and more places to explore.
Shrinkflation: The Game
I will drop the series if the next game is like BotW/TotK. I should really have dropped it after BotW, but I was foolish and thought Nintendo would fix their mistakes even though BotW had insane praise and sales.
I would also play a new 2D Zelda but it seems like we're doomed to a decade+ of soulless remakes, at best.
Skill issue + ADHD.
Loving TOK just as much as I did BotW.
Oh look, another spam thread. Imagine how many games you could enjoy if you weren't b***hing about only this one.
https://arch.b4k.co/v/search/image/sRbRGxczk9bT4ouLrbjSNw/
https://arch.b4k.co/v/search/image/xSsMS88NbF3ZYqqf5m85cg/
https://arch.b4k.co/v/search/image/6Ish0UyXmgiUmwy0cCGDfw/
https://arch.b4k.co/v/search/image/l7fLAPGt_wNBaKHRgOC0yA/
https://arch.b4k.co/v/search/image/ZpIP40FDhp-iTQJv8HhUuA/
https://arch.b4k.co/v/search/image/etFRHp_8rh0gjXJKjuSsMw/
https://arch.b4k.co/v/search/image/JlxUeh5Zs_nkfhQSfQMi_w/
https://arch.b4k.co/v/search/image/Tg7jjS2IoNuYdT9PFg1L-w/
>a bunch of different filenames
Are you too stupid to realize that people are just saving the same image off Google?
The posts contents all read the exact same. If it was a few then sure but there's hundreds there.
You are mentally ill, obsessed, and unhinged, Darren "eric" Weathers
>almost all of them are made during shitskins, europoors and chinks/asiatics hours
haha
>Snoys still mad daily about TotK
Fricking kek
>tendies still SEETHING daily that all the actual goty contenders this year were playstation games
Fucjing lol
Black personman didn’t win a single award though
False, and bg3 is a PS5 game, not a shitch game
For me it was the water "temple". The great sky island was a terrible first impression, just a worse more boring great plateau in every way. But after that things felt like they were getting better, I had a bit of hope that the game was going to be alright. Although that hope steadily eroded as I realized just how little they done to improve/change things since botw. Still, I stuck it out and really tried to have fun. And in fact, I was able to mostly enjoy the sky temple despite how barebones it was. But the water temple was too much. Every single element of it was just so insultingly bad. Even the music sucked. I dropped the game right after it and haven't picked it back up since.
Not only am I not buying the next game if it's more open world garbage, I'm probably not even buying the next nintendo console.
I can't believe there's people schizo enough to pretend to like this shit just because it's popular.
>combat is 99% enemies falling over from a stiff breeze, still takes forever because enemies are damage sponges and chemistry reactions deal a fixed amount of damage balanced for level 1 or 2 enemies
>oh yeah, enemies only get harder throughout the game via NUMBER GO UP, so all enemy behaviors are also balanced around you going straight to them after the tutorial
>puzzles are only occasionally fun and it's always coincidence because the only mechanics they're willing to use are ones you were taught in the tutorial and ones you were taught five minutes ago
>SECRET STONES? DEMON KING? SECRET STONES? DEMON KING? SECRET STONES? DEMON KING? SECRET STONES? DEMON KING?
>sky islands and depths both manage to be even more repetitive, and worse, PREDICTABLE, than the original overworld, which was already stuffed to the gills with busywork
TOTK's combat is by no means special, but it's better than the combat in other Zelda games. Twilight Princess has the mechanically best combat, but the enemies are so weak and non-threatening that it never reaches its potential. If you want to shit on TOTK's combat, go ahead, just know that no other Zelda game meets that standard either.
>you have to cheat to make it "fun"
>using gameplay mechanics is cheating
Yeah you should stick to your movie games like TLOU
False, child
>d-debunked
You need to post proof of that first
Meant for
>webm
>the most common enemy in the game
>at its second level out of five
>doesn't die when at point blank in an explosion
That isn't fricking "threatening", that's a damage sponge.
BOTW/TOTK's combat doesn't reach its potential either because there's no incentive to do any of the cool shit. The enemies fall over when you look at them wrong, they barely even know how to attack.
there are 2 blue enemies, the one in the explosion died after a single melee attack
>at its second level out of five
TOTK doesn't have gold enemies actually.
>That isn't fricking "threatening"
Any of those silver enemies would've killed him in one hit. It's very easy for one of them to slip in a hit and take most of your health. Most enemies in Twilight Princess only do half a heart of damage. You're absolutely right about the environmental damage being fixed and not scaled. But that doesn't mean the "cool" mechanics are useless.
there can be an inbetween. just because one thing was wrong doesnt mean the exact opposite is right
The issue I take is that the whole thing feels sideways.
Fundamentally, in most fights at least combat skill only gives the smallest amount of additional damage, and largely incidentally. The primary benefit of fighting well isn't doing more damage, but locking enemies down harder. The result is that you spend roughly the same amount of time, significantly more effort, and slightly fewer resources.
I would be fine if enemies had more threatening attack patterns, but most enemies struggle to break through even the most cursory awareness and the most basic defensive tactics, just like prior games, so holding them back with 100% reliability barely even feels like a reward, no matter how many hearts of damage they'll do with what's usually a 1% chance of a stray hit.
If they want the enemies to be this easy, the reward for good play that exploits all the mechanics should have a lot more damage to it.
>ragdoll
>ragdoll
>ragdoll
>but the enemies are so weak and non-threatening that it never reaches its potential
But botk is the same way. "Strong" enemies in botk are awful to fight because they're the same braindead AI as the weakest enemies but with so much health that nothing cool or interesting scratches them. So it becomes pure tedium.
The archery in the botk games is cool and, while the menuing is total ass, throwing things in totk is a neat mechanic (that doesn't get properly utilized for the above reasons). Outside of that the combat is trash and I'd rather be playing a 2d game.
i never played a single zelda game that came out after totk
Using the same map in an open world game is criminal. The map is the whole point.
>Shitch has no gameplay, shitch "games" are madwe for toddlers, they play themselves. Shitendo trash has always been the real moviegames, which is why tendies try so desperately to "NO U" and call anything with graphics better than an N64 a "movie game" lije spiderannm and the last of id
>tendie is jealous yet again that all their "games" are for toddlers and not adults
I forgot, tendies hate sex, unless it's wioth little children because you're all pedophiles
Oh i like sex, just not degenerated troony sex like in TLOU2 because apparently thats the only type sony won’t censor, any attractive anime women get censored instantly
False, tendies like you are all pedphio.les, Darren "reic" Weahters
Giving you all these super centralizing powers from the start is a mistake and one of the most mechanically antithetical aspects of the Wild games versus the older games. Put each of these powers in a Temple and build the puzzles within them primarily with their given powers in mind.
>BUT ANON, IT'S NOT AN ADVENTURE IF I CAN'T FRICK OFF TO ANY CORNER OF THE WORLD AND DO ANYTHING I WANT AT ANY TIME! (I have never experienced an actual sense of adventure)
>ZELDA 1 LET ME DO THAT! (it didn't but I am a BOTWgay and this is the response I've been trained to give)
It's funny to see them lean on the vague mentions of Zelda 1 in interviews as their holy grail "gotcha" against critical fans of the older games and to claim the Wild games as actually being "the only REAL sequels" to it. But when you actually play(!) Zelda 1, you'll see:
>dungeons with required items that aren't just dumped on your lap at the start of the game
>an intended dungeon order with some dungeons stopping your progress quickly if you don't have a certain item in mind
>a final dungeon that requires you to have beaten all of the main dungeons to even enter
That sounds a hell of a lot more like the games from the 90s and 2000s to me than "do whatever!" structureless sandboxes.
The killing blow is to remind them that the two founders of the metroidvania genre were both based on Zelda. Metroidvania, a genre now entirely known for item gating, is the spawn of Zelda.
>an intended dungeon order with some dungeons stopping your progress quickly if you don't have a certain item in mind
Except you could do Zelda 1's dungeons in hundreds of different orders and only some dungeons required items like the raft. You could enter Dungeon 8 after getting the bow, grab the magical key, and never have to deal with keys in any of the other dungeons ever again. Zelda 1 wasn't structureless, but it wasn't as rigid and stifling as Wind Waker, Twilight Princess, or Skyward Sword.
ALTTP struck the best middle ground with more structure in the light world and more freedom in the dark world. You can see they were experimenting with more player freedom in ALBW too. BOTW is absolutely a step in the right direction after Skyward Slop.
>BOTW is absolutely a step in the right direction after Skyward Slop.
No it wasn't. You said it yourself, ALttP was the best middle ground. Botw was an overcorrection. It was an understandable overcorrection and I don't hold near as much animosity towards it as totk. But it was clear even during botw's honeymoon period that the openness needed to be reigned in.
If I had to choose between too much structure and too much freedom, I'd choose too much freedom. At least in BotW/TotK if there is something I don't want to do, I don't have to do it. In TP for example you have to do the stupid collectathon shit as the wolf.
>Part of Zelda's core identity is that the world opens up over time, in response to you growing stronger and more capable.
I disagree with this. The 3D games don't even item gate as much as they story gate. You can't go to certain areas or do certain dungeons unless you've triggered some cutscene. This has nothing to do with progression at all. This is why the Metroidvania comparison doesn't work. Super Metroid lets you sequence break the entire game because it relies on item gates. 3D Zeldas rely on story gates that don't let you do shit.
>And Zelda 1's item gating is far closer to OoT's and even SS's than BotW's
This just isn't true. Most items in Zelda 1 aren't even required to beat the game, they just make beating it easier. And OoT is what started the trend of "required" items being useless outside of their respective dungeon.
>If I had to choose between too much structure and too much freedom, I'd choose too much freedom.
Then we have fundamentally incompatible ideas on game design. I'm not here to play pretend and have whatever I want to do validated.
>The 3D games don't even item gate as much as they story gate
Severely overstated. There's a reason you can do any of the first three and either of the last two adult dungeons in pretty much whatever order: It's item gating.
>This just isn't true.
"Has item gates to actual progression" and "has only the barest whiff of item gating" are far less similar than "has item gates to actual progression" and "has both item and story gates to actual progression".
>Severely overstated. There's a reason you can do any of the first three and either of the last two adult dungeons in pretty much whatever order: It's item gating.
Is it an overstatement when MM, WW, TP, and SS have heavy amounts of story gating? ALTTP and OoT design philosophy died long before BotW. And you know why you can't do the Shadow Temple before the Water Temple? It's not an item gate stopping you, it's a story gate.
>"Has item gates to actual progression" and "has only the barest whiff of item gating" are far less similar than "has item gates to actual progression" and "has both item and story gates to actual progression".
BotW and Zelda 1 have minimal item gating and minimal story gating. I'm not arguing that BotW is more of a Zelda game than OoT. The point is that you can't just say it isn't a "real" Zelda game because it doesn't item/story gate as much as OoT, because the original doesn't either.
>BotW and Zelda 1 have minimal item gating and minimal story gating.
Stop it. This is bullshit and you know it. Zelda 1 being a bit more open at the start than the other games is not in any way comparable to botk having no structure whatsoever. Trying to defend botk's identity as a zelda game on the basis that it's more like Zelda 1 is incorrect, dishonest, and stupid.
You should at least play Zelda 1 before engaging in these discussions. 1, 2, 3, and 8 can be done without any items. 4 needs the raft. 5 needs the ladder. 7 needs the recorder. When this is your entire basis for saying BotW isn't a Zelda game, it's obvious to everyone else that this is just a justification to exclude a game you personally dislike. The fact that they both heavily emphasize exploration and have you spend more time in the overworld than in dungeons doesn't matter, you arbitrarily decided that item gates were the defining feature of Zelda games. But if that's the case, then Zelda shouldn't even exist because Metroidvanias do item gates far better.
Item gates WERE the defining feature of Zelda games. Literally. The concept of "here is a virtual space, you can run around, eventually you'll collect all the things" was not harder to achieve than a game with the levels in a line, it was easier. It's just that everyone knew that sucked shit to play. Most games went with levels in a line because there was an EXPECTATION that games have a goal you work towards, a win state, or at least a high score to earn as your inevitable doom creeps in. To have an end, you have to have a beginning and a middle. Hence, levels in a line.
Zelda was remarkable because it represented a way to give the player the experience of not necessarily knowing which way was forward at all times, while still ultimately HAVING a beginning, a middle, and an end. They're not as strictly defined as in many other games, or even as in most later Zeldas, but it has them.
Also, even if they're not all necessary for progression, Zelda 1's items being largely new functions you unlock over time rather than stackable upgrades to basic stuff you've had since the tutorial is a major difference I think you're underselling.
If item gates were the defining feature of Zelda games, then the 3D Zelda games completely failed. The way item gating is done in 3D Zelda is lazy and shallow. In OoT the Hover Boots are an item required to beat the game, but they're only useful in the Shadow Temple. This kind of item gate based progression is totally artificial because as soon as you leave the Shadow Temple they may as well not exist. OoT isn't as bad about this, but the later 3D Zelda games are full of useless items that are nothing but glorified keys.
>Zelda was remarkable because it represented a way to give the player the experience of not necessarily knowing which way was forward at all times, while still ultimately HAVING a beginning, a middle, and an end. They're not as strictly defined as in many other games, or even as in most later Zeldas, but it has them.
How does this not apply to BotW? The Great Plateau is your beginning, and everything you do afterwards forwards your goal of getting stronger to fight Ganon.
>Also, even if they're not all necessary for progression, Zelda 1's items being largely new functions you unlock over time rather than stackable upgrades to basic stuff you've had since the tutorial is a major difference I think you're underselling.
TotK gives you access to new functions in the form of zoni devices and fuse materials, but people like to pretend those mechanics don't count.
The presence of item gating is the defining feature of Zelda games. not their quality. 3D Zelda games often fricked up, yes, but their frickups were closer to "good Zelda" than BotW's successes by virtue of being based around fricking ITEM GATES. Because every other game was level based.
>The Great Plateau is your beginning, and everything you do afterwards forwards your goal of getting stronger to fight Ganon
Forgive me, I thought it would've been clear from how I talked about it that by "beginning, middle, and end" I did not mean a game that has literally three progression states like "Started the game, finished the tutorial, and beat the game".
>TotK gives you access to new functions in the form of zoni devices and fuse materials
Okay, I'll give you that. I don't value them as highly as even Zelda 1's items, much less, say, ALttP's or OoT's, but they're better than korok seeds and Hyliacoin. I think the value of even relatively unique zonai parts and fuse material is lessened by the constant need to replenish your supply if you actually use them; it holds the game back from incentivizing their use. But they're not the worst thing ever.
>If I had to choose between too much structure and too much freedom, I'd choose too much freedom.
Why? Loads of completely linear games are great. But completely open games are only good if they're sandbox stuff like minecraft.
And it's a false choice anyway. Zelda games before botk were all varying degrees of open without any of them going full moron and abandoning any sense of structure. Not even ALBW did that. So, in trying to correct from SS's excessive linearity, there was no need to completely abandon the concept of progression. And they certainly didn't need to do it twice.
>BOTW is absolutely a step in the right direction after Skyward Slop.
It's a massive overcorrection, we'd be lucky if Nintendo realizes it.
Part of Zelda's core identity is that the world opens up over time, in response to you growing stronger and more capable. BotW gives you one of its two most powerful movement tools when you start the game and the other when you finish the tutorial, and they're what gate 95% of the game world's accessible space.
Also, Zelda 1 absolutely had an intended order. Yes, there are many orders, but there's not as many orders as there would be could you do any dungeon whenever you liked, that's the point that anon was making.
And Zelda 1's item gating is far closer to OoT's and even SS's than BotW's, because BotW has like three instances of it. Which is, AGAIN, the point the anon was trying to make.
>can only think in terms of "Z1/LttP vs. WW/TP/SS"
Can't help but, uh, notice that you're missing a christ ton of games between those. I wonder why.
Not to mention that the Wild games only have five dungeons which are all functionally short as FRICK (especially TotK, with some of them only having FOUR goddamn things to do/activate).
>BOTW is absolutely a step in the right direction after Skyward Slop.
I would argue not. Skyward Sword was definitely a flawed game, but I still had way more fun playing it than BotW. Despite its many flaws, I have fond memories of SS. Can't say the same for BotW and TotK, nothing about them stuck with me.
I loved hyrule castle in botw. The only thing that I don't like about it is I have to type alttp if I want to listen to the real hyrule castle music on youtube.
Recommend games that can turn OP into a homosexual.
anything on shitch
That would cause the opposite effect sadly
False
False, child
I'm not someone who gets bored with games easily, but this game is just a rewardless slog. You spend most of the time traveling from place. Other than unlocking shrines, it feels like I'm making no progress towards anything. There's not even fun music, it's just one big snoozefest.
Why are tendies so obsessed with children?
I still have high hopes for the series. I lost interest with TP/SS but adding physics into Zelda made it fun again. BotW was a tech demo but still new enough to be interesting. TotK was a lazy cash-in. All I wanted was a smaller new map and dungeons and this time they can't reuse the same exact assets. Also hopefully a new artstyle.
>False, child
Who let Patrick Tomlinson on Ganker
>botw
>open world slop with FRICKING NOTHING to do
>everyone wont stfu about how omg amazing it is
>totk
>open world slop with STUFF to do
>literally everyone shits their pants about how amazing it is for a week after launch, and nobody speaks of it ever again
It's insane how mind fricked botw/totk has shown people to be. ToTK is better at -every single fricking thing- , yet the entire conversation around it is wildly muted.
botw was cool for the novelty of it but once the honeymoon period was up my opinion soured
TotK's staying power was also hurt by not having DLC or Master Mode.
master mode in botw sucked and DLC shouldn't be the modern requirement that it is.
You never said anything that contradicted him.
>You never said anything that contradicted him.
Item gating dungeons was the exception, not the rule, in Zelda 1.
No, totk is worse than botw in almost every way, including having even less to do and all that stuff being worse. The side quests are worse, more of the shrines are blessings and the ones that aren't have worse puzzles, "help me find my friend" koroks are both extremely tedious and antithetical to the games' design, the sky island reuse is insultingly bad, the depths are completely desolate of anything cool or interesting. Not even the "temples" are straight upgrades, with even more braindead "puzzles" than the divine beasts.
But the worst thing, and probably why even normalgays shit on it compared to botw, is that the gameplay is overwhelmingly worse. The menuing is some of the worst I have ever been subjected to. It's even bad in comparison to the n64 and gameboy games. And the runes suck in a "change for the sake of change" way where they don't mesh with the world and the game's mechanics like botw's did and the absence of botw's runes also makes the world feel worse to traverse.
They had 6 fricking years and they couldn't add some dungeons to the game? Not even one?
Why not throw old fans a bone and add one or two traditional dungeons? They could even be totally optional to avoid alienating their new smooth brain casual audience.
Aonuma hates old Zelda fans now. He thinks traditional dungeons and puzzles are dated.
It's fricking criminal that between the depths, the surface, and the sky, there's only one dungeon in the depths, one on the surface, and two in the sky.
>if this thing that happened only in my head happened, it would be like this
False
Yeah you are right, it is false because the scenario in your image never happened, im happy you are coming to terms with your schizophrenia
WAAAAAAH WAAAAAAH
I WANT MORE SCRIPTED EVENTS LIKE SNOY GAMES WAAAAAAAAH
You mean like the walking and talking segment with Zelda in the intro that's unskippable and adds nothing to the game? Or how the tutorial sidetracks you to do a scripted failed check for Heart Containers before you can do the last Shrine? Or how you HAVE to take a Heart Container before leaving? Fricking, "oops".
Scripted events are fine as long as they're good. The issue is that BotW and TotK is full of them, and they're of lesser quality than the ones in previous Zeldas.
I loved BOTW but I agree TOTK was shit. I actively avoided most of the building shit because it is just not fun. Without out the game has nothing else to offer.
Shitendo has never been good, including zelda
Just going to ignore the consolehomosexualry and answer the question
>showcasing how you samegayged for 3 hours straight as an accomplishment
Schizos never learn do they?
False
False, child
Why are you so obsessed with children, Darren "eric" Weathers?
>Why are you so obsessed with children
Im not a playstation employee, eric, see
That has been debunked many times, Darren "eric" Weathers
Where has it been debunked?
Don't worry, the source code for BotW will leak in 10+ years time then fans can make an actually good game from it.
Why does Majora's Mask get a pass but not TikTok? Majora's Mask has a bunch of filler and only four mediocre dungeons.
>Majora's Mask has a dense small world with varied objectives and sidequests
>MM has real dungeons, plus interesting mini-dungeons
That's why.
You're an idiot if you think the next Zelda game is just going to be BOTW 3.
I'm in the same boat, luckily there's this guy named Miyazaki and he makes my games now.
Bingtendo is bleeding money and likely will go bankrupt before they release a shitch 2
>shitty physics "puzzles" (and I use the term loosely)
BOTW and TOTK's puzzles are literally objectively the best ones in the series. The older Zelda "puzzles" were shit designed for 1st-graders at the highest. I swear Nintendo fans suffer from some kind of severe arrested-development and have the tastes/minds of literal toddlers. Also severe delusion. Explains why they think shit like Kirby is actually good.
>"Zelda fan" hates the series before BotW
every goddamn time.
>Switchgays when a Zelda game doesn't just let you craft a penis swastika copter and go right to the final boss
I wouldn't say I "hated" the series, but I sure didn't see it as anything above a 7/10 adventure game series for children. Which it was and majority of people who don't have nostalgia for it nor are attached to Nintendo think too. The series direction change with BOTW is an OBJECTIVE improvement. Believing otherwise is pure delusion, nothing else.
>game has good hitboxes that reward risk taking
>this is bad
>The series direction change with BOTW is an OBJECTIVE improvement.
It's not, it doesn't even feel like Zelda anymore. Take away the Zelda character designs names and it could be a completely new IP
I honestly think BotW would have benefited a lot from being a new IP. The story and world could have been built around the gameplay systems rather than wearing the skin of an otherwise unrelated IP. There wouldn't have been any expectations to include the Master Sword for example.
you wont be missed
Didn't even bother with the DLCs. I'm just tired.
I feel like people are coming at the "BotW vs. Zelda 1" argument from the perspective that Zelda 1 has "less progression" than its contemporaries, and that this was somehow not just the intent, but the primary intent. But that's not how it works. If you think like that, you're nowhere near the right frame of mind. Zelda 1 was made in a time where just "removing" progression was not even on the table.
The progression they included was not an afterthought to a game intended to be entirely open, the progression WAS the game, and the freedom was part of the progression. Everything was considered with respect to what it did to move the player forward (or stop them from doing such), not just what it would be like for the player to poke. Generic rewards existed, and were plentiful, but there were plenty of handcrafted rewards with specific benefits and uses as well.
And the two latest games are the antithesis of that. Virtually everything that "moves the player forward" is genericized so that it can be given to the player over and over and always technically be a benefit. But this hamstrings the benefit you get from any given reward, or even type of reward. What few things are entirely new utilities, the game struggles to present a use case for. Worst of all, the only "forward" to go for most of the game's runtime is chasing purely statistical benefits, given how most of the game is technically optional if you just want to beat the final boss.