Topic: Please explain me why Breath of the Wild got so many high scores

Have you actually played any other Zelda games? Just last page you were talking about Breath of the Wild being the first game you completed in the series or something.

And you're strawmanning. Please understand the difference between not being able to reckon with a genre change and just thinking that Zelda games are better than generic open world me-toos.

Firstly, how many Zelda games someone's played doesn't impact their ability to judge BotW as a game in its own right.

Secondly, I own and have played (at least some of) 8 Zelda games, LttP, OoT3D, MM3D, WWHD, TP, SS, HW and BotW, but only finished 2 of them (plus nearly there with BotW). Plus I also own ALBW and PH, but haven't touched them yet. Pay closer attention and you'll see it was WWHD that was the first one I played right through.

Whether that qualifies me as a 'Zelda fan' in your eyes...

..but I do like the series. Am I allowed an opinion yet?

because Zelda fans are annoying. They genuinely believe the series has reached its peak 20 years ago, and that every minucule change to a format that has been used and abused ever since, results in an automatic disintegration of the series they love. On the one hand they want their favourite game to be successful and up-to-date, on the other they don't want Nintendo to try to cater to new audiences by removing all the clutter and the nonsense that resulted from trying to tweak the same formula and squeeze the same plot to death for more than 2 decades.

Besides, it's not that BotW is light years away from many Zelda. Back then they used to put a boulder between point A and point B and you had to run around in circles until you found yourself on the other side of the thing. Nowadays they just put a mountain and you have to climb it. Big deal.

The only true difference I can see is that while taking an absolutely pointless and esoteric route just to go around a boulder makes the average Zelda fan feel like a genius, climbing a mountain makes them feel like an average Assassin's Creed fan.

Well that's just the thing, you can judge any game in isolation but to have any meaningful sense of context you're going to have to be familiar with the series it comes from. For instance, if you've only played the first two dungeons of a few Zelda games and got bored I'm sure the puzzles will seem about as deep as Breath of the Wild, the story, the world, the characters, etc, etc and so on.

...buuuuut those games don't stop evolving after 10 hours. The reason experience with Zelda is so imperative is because there's literally no series like it, certainly none of the same caliber. You can say "action-adventure, metroidvanian and puzzle elements," whatever, but it really is its own genre. The items you get in the first hour are going to have different or cumulative uses in the last, and late game items can be brought back into the world and used to claim items you might have seen at the beginning of the game but not been able to attain.

All that stuff literally isn't in Breath of the Wild so you wouldn't know whether it's a 3D Zelda game or not.

That's rich with this game's threadbare plot. I'm not saying you have to care about the timeline or get tattoos, my point about Zelda fans is that you should have an appreciation for the series if you're going to compare Breath of the Wild to it. One which you clearly lack. And fine, go ahead and not play real Zelda games, I can understand how someone who's so fascinated by walking through grass and killing things would find them boring and overly complex. Just don't say that Breath is a Zelda game, because it hopped on the open world bandwagon and abandoned its former genre.

I've played trough every Zelda game to date, BOTW being the newest playtrough for me.

I haven't found all the shrines yet (about 80 the last time I played) and I can't say yet if it's the best Zelda game. I've enjoyed it a lot but there are a good number of improvements I want to see in the future: more traditional Zelda dungeons in addition to shrines, better side quests storywise and better story overall, more enemy variety and music (I get it's a huge world and TP style overworld music wouldn't suit it, but I really want more songs in my Zelda game).

@Haru17 There's butthurt in that post, and I get it, but this whole thread is about why BotW got such good reviews, not whether it qualifies as a 'Zelda' game or not. It not living up to your Zelda standards doesn't have much relevance as to why the gaming media rated it.

It's judged by how good a game it is, not by how good a Zelda game it is.

@Haru17 I'd definitely consider myself a Zelda fan. I obsessed over the original as a child. I'd rank ALTTP, Wind Waker and Majoras Mask as amongst my favourite games of all time (depending on how I feel I'd possibly even put all 3 in my top 5).

I understand the mechanics and structure. There's something about seeing a puzzle you can't solve yet because you (probably...) don't have the right tools yet that speaks to a primal part of my brain. It's why I love Metroid too. It's an addictive thing and it makes me feel a little warm inside.

That said it is tired and often predictable. It doesn't have the same revelatory impact on me that it did when I first played ALTTP. In part I think that's because the games have been going through the motions for a long time.

We've been over the same ground many times so I know we won't agree (and that's fine by the way - it's still interesting to discuss) but I think that BoTW is far more "Zelda-like" than you do. Not only in the feelings it conveys but also in the general progression of your character and puzzle structure. The whole of the Zora's domain area for instance where you're (effectively) prohibited from climbing and eventually get a special item that lets you climb waterfalls to otherwise inaccessible places could have come out of any 3d Zelda game.

It just does away with many of the artificial road blocks that Zelda has increasingly resorted to.

I've played almost every Zelda game (there are about three I haven't) and beaten most of them them (can't be bothered to beat Zelda 2). Zelda was my second game series after Pokemon. I'm definitely a fan.

I really liked BotW and think it's a great game.

Now, I think the main difference in our experiences is that I play the game to entertain myself, while you seem to have played the game to complete it.

I guess I would have a lower opinion of it if I had treated it as a job instead of as a game. 900 korok puzzles isn't easy on the mind.

The truth is that Nintendo gets to choose what is and isn't a Zelda game, not disgruntled fans who are upset about the series evolving past the same tired formula that has been in play since 1998.

I do think there is some truth in the idea that BotW is a Zelda game for people who aren't necessarily Zelda fans, though. It's clearly not meant to be "another Zelda game," and while this is divisive for fans of the series, I'm excited to see how the series evolves from this point.

I loved this game and I'm very excited for the next one, which I hope won't take too long.

I love this game so much. OoT-SS were like Fallout 4 to me, while BotW was my New Vegas. It looked back at what the first installment was and decided to follow its roots rather than continuing the further linear degradation of the most recent entries.

That said, It's missing a focus on building up lore. The story raises a lot of questions (How did Ganon become a cloud made out of hate? Why does Zelda have thw Triforce? How advanced were the Shiekah and what led them to use tech instead of the classic sealing method used in the past? What would a fully resurrected mortal Ganon look like, and why is it somehow more powerful than his Calamity Form?)

I think that lore explanations and exposition on what happened 10,000 years ago and even before would've been a better incentive to explore than Korok seeds. I'd rather they had focused on making large ancient ruins with unique enemies and worldbuilding lore and maybe even artifacts to find at the end.

The final fight is also a bit lackluster, though it's a bit better when you fight it in boss rush mode. The fight IS challenging on Master Mode. I had a harder time with it than I did Golden Lynels.

The difference I can see is that in previous games everytime you ran around in circles you had a new item to try in places you already visited to keep you curious and interested in what you could find around, where secrets could be hidden and so on, now in BotW you get all the main abilities very early in the game and because of this after some hours of playing you feel like the game has nothing new to show you, and it isa a lot easier to lose interest that way.
Expecially since the "point of interest" are more or less as much as in previous (much smaller) games, so people were used to games that felt a lot more "dense" if not actually more rich of real content (but usually they were more rich of actual contents too if you ask me)

I wouldn't say the ''classic'' Zelda formula is tiresome. 2D and 3D are as different as 2D and 3D Mario games are. Focusing on the 3D games: Majora's Mask was structurally different from any other 3D Zelda game. Wind Waker didn't feel like an OOT clone. And Skyward Sword, well... you know. It's been 11 years since the last 3D Zelda game I thoroughly enjoyed. So I would definitely like to see another one in the same vein.

BOTW does some good stuff, just make the world smaller, bring back key items (why was fishing not a thing in this game!?), classic themed dungeons with their own unique boss fights, a bit more enemy variety and limit the climbing. Heck, keep it open world if that's what everyone wants, you can tackle any dungeon in any order, and you can go anywhere you want. As long as they keep everything balanced, especially the boss fights, the elemental blights got easier with each consecutive fight. Maybe they should just stick to a single sword...

Regarding whether this is a Zelda game or not, I'd say yes it is. I'm 45 years old started with the original Zelda when it came out. If I had to choose one game that isn't a real Zelda game, I'd say Majoras Mask. Only Zelda game I've played but never beaten. It was too frustrating for me. Tried again on 3DS and it was every bit as annoying as the first time around. BOTW is definitely different, but still feels like a Zelda game to me, and I've played them all, from consoles to Game Boys and DS's, etc.

Bring back classic dungeons, but include the more clever puzzles in BotW and don't bring back the linear path to solve them. Something nore like the original TLoZ dungeons would be great. Dungeon items would be great, but don't lock things in the overworld behind those items unless it's something of extreme importance.

Keep the current combat system but increase durability, or maybe even get rid of the durability aspect for certain weapons.

More enemy variety would be great, and Bosses with unique mechanics again would be much appreciated.

Keep the climbing aspect the way it is. It's a great feature and I like it exactly how it is.

More towns, story moments, and dungeons would be perfect. I'd also like the final boss to be incredibly difficult, and it needs to have character. A more in your face story and great stand alone sidequests with their own villains would also be a massive plus.

The traditional Zelda formula formed by ALttP and perpetuated by all titles afterwards should be left to future 2D entries. Future 3D entries should work on taking the original TLoZ/BotW formula and improving it even more, while adding depth to side experinces, dungeons, and bosses.

I agree to the rest of the post, but not about this. Key item should be obtained throughout the entire adventure and mantain their meaning, so it is great if you can TRY to go anywhere you want, but only near the end of the game you should really be able to go anywhere you want, because without key items you all the sense of progression is lost and all the fun is lost as well. If I can go anywhere I want since the beginning in a game like this that: don't have an experience system to make the main character stronger, don't have interesting lore to help the immersion, don't have a good story to keep me interested, don't have anything to keep me engaged then it is legitimate for anybody who don't like walking simulators to think that game is empty and boring

If a Metroid game was made the same way of Breath of the wild now we would have a generic open world shooter.

If only they tried to make this game look a little less "generic"!

@Tarvaax Some more lore would definitely help. I really love the setting, but a lot of the lore in the Zelda series is either really vague or just flat out isn't really explored at all. I think it would really help this game especially, because I find it has the least amount of the "Zelda feeling" out of any of the Zeldas I've played.

@Tarvaax If you bring back key items, they need a use. I wouldn't mind overworld puzzles that used those items. Otherwise, what's the point?

Climbing ruins a lot of thing, I've missed a lot of stuff in BOTW because I approached certain locations from the wrong area. They tried level design in BOTW, but it doesn't work because you can approach it from every angle.

Your last paragraph read a bit like: ''Keep Other M as an example for future 3D Metroid games, the 2D games should be based on Super Metroid. No Prime allowed.''

@Octane The difference is that nobody liked Other M's approach, and it also didn't have any real precedent in the series. BotW, on the other hand, is a colossally popular game, and is more akin to the original Legend of Zelda in the way it is set up. So, you have at least two different design philosophies for the series that are both popular. It makes sense to stick with the traditional Zelda formula for the 2D games and innovate more in the open world direction with the 3D games.

Also, the climbing is a huge part of BotW's appeal. What a sequel really needs is more "open air" dungeons like Ganon's Castle, where it's fun and challenging no matter what angle you approach it from.

@Ralizah The irony is that Other M was more similar to Metroid (NES) than Prime was. I get it what you're saying, but that's just how it sounds to me, except I actually like Other M.

It's not fun to me though. Going literally anywhere is quite boring IMO. No barriers, you can do everything in a straight line. You don't need to figure out how to get there, just walk/climb/glide in that direction, it's a mindless process.