Quantcast
The Official Legend of Zelda Thread: Breath of the Wild Sells 13.61 Million on Switch

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - The Official Legend of Zelda Thread: Breath of the Wild Sells 13.61 Million on Switch

Best Zelda news from E3?

Breath of the Wild sequel in development 32 94.12%
 
Cadence of Hyrule launches June 13 1 2.94%
 
Dungeon Creator in Link's Awakening 1 2.94%
 
Link's Awakening Amiibo 0 0.00%
 
Color Dungeon in Link's Awakening 0 0.00%
 
Link's Awakening Special Edition/SteelBook 0 0.00%
 
Other 0 0.00%
 
Total:34
AngryLittleAlchemist said:
irstupid said:

You need to just stop. You are wrong. 

YOu say it's the beginning of the game. It's an open world, you can go anywhere. Some argue Hateno village is where you shoudl go first, while other parts of cutscenes and dialogue suggest the one goes to the Sky place first. But point is, you can easily have enough powerful weapon on the Plateu alone to beat that Major Test of Strength. But beyond htat, on the path to Hateno village, you run into guys who tell you about some secret treasure that gets you good weapons. As people have said, there is enemies with plenty of weapons near the shrine. Ect.

OH and guess what I did at times. I enter a shrine, see it says "difficulty Test of Strength" and I look at inventory.  Depending on my stuff I either go forward or turn around and exit. You are not forced to do the shrine when you enter it. So if you accidently enter something too hard, you leave. Oh and besides the tests of strength, every other shrine is beatable with the runes or the items given in the dungeon alone.

But don't bring in shit like, "Oh following the story, you see this tempting shrine in distance" as an excuse that it should be easy or people will go there. What about the fucking hyrulian castle that is tempting and sitting in view nearly at all times. You gonna bitch and moan that heading towards that is hard and you get killed and can't beat the guardians. 

THis isn't about "get good" it's a bout common sense. You enter a test of major strength shrine and your bitch ass is only carrying some deku sticks and a rusty broadsword, LEAVE.

This is the problem with Breath of the Wild. Because it's "completely open" people can use any excuse they want to forgive the game. "Oh, you can go there whenever you want!"  "Oh, that sidequest is boring? You don't need to do it!" "Oh, you don't like the game very much? Just skip to the end of the game bruh"

The reason why I didn't know that it was one of the toughest bosses? Because the game doesn't tell you what level the bosses are in proportion! You don't go in the shrine and it says "guess what bitch? this is one of the hardest shrines in the game!" What, do you expect me to look up every single thing about the game the moment I come across it? Isn't Breath of the Wild about the wonders of exploring? Do I now have to look up every portion of the game and see if it makes sense compared to my weapon durability levels?

The castle is one of the worst examples you could possibly come up with. It's literally the end of the game, OF COURSE you know from the beginning that it's going to be hard. Combat shrines aren't the same, unless you already know how they scale you can go into one without knowing how hard it is (and before you make fun of me because it said "Major", know that many games use ridiculous and over the top wording for their scaling systems. For all I knew the hardest could have been two levels above that). 

Not only that, but I DIDN'T have rusty weapons at the time. This is just a shitty excuse that other people put on me that I never said even happen. What, are you guys going to guess my entire inventory now to make an excuse for a mechanic? Really? 

And if you're talking about the treasure that gave you a flame sword ... I actually got that. You might be talking about different treasure though. Guess which boss I broke it to? 

The game didn't tell me this or that, whaa whaa whaa. The game did tell you. When you walked in that shrine and it said major test of strength and when you couldn't beat it. There. That's when it told you. Now you know. The game saves when you enter the shrine, so you lost out on maybe 5 minutes of your time.  

And yes, open worlds do give excuses in being that. YOu can't have an open world game and hold a person hand at the same time. 

I hope someday you get over your traumatizing experience of dying in Breath of the Wild. 



Around the Network
irstupid said:

The game didn't tell me this or that, whaa whaa whaa. The game did tell you. When you walked in that shrine and it said major test of strength and when you couldn't beat it. There. That's when it told you. Now you know. The game saves when you enter the shrine, so you lost out on maybe 5 minutes of your time.  

And yes, open worlds do give excuses in being that. YOu can't have an open world game and hold a person hand at the same time. 

I hope someday you get over your traumatizing experience of dying in Breath of the Wild. 

Wait, what? So your first argument is that I should have known it was one of the hardest shrine bosses, then your example of this is a castle (you know ... the ending area of the game which is obviously going to be difficult), but then you say I'm whining for saying that the game should tell me how hard it is? I'm not even saying it should, I am LITERALLY EXPLAINING why I went in not knowing it was one of the most difficult shrines. You can't say something equivalent to "you're stupid why didn't you know it was hard?" and then call me a whiner for explaining why. How does that work? 

I'm convinced that you don't even know what's being talked about in this conversation. I didn't die to the boss in the shrine. I just left the shrine after trying for a long time. And my entire arsenal was gone.



AngryLittleAlchemist said:
irstupid said:

The game didn't tell me this or that, whaa whaa whaa. The game did tell you. When you walked in that shrine and it said major test of strength and when you couldn't beat it. There. That's when it told you. Now you know. The game saves when you enter the shrine, so you lost out on maybe 5 minutes of your time.  

And yes, open worlds do give excuses in being that. YOu can't have an open world game and hold a person hand at the same time. 

I hope someday you get over your traumatizing experience of dying in Breath of the Wild. 

Wait, what? So your first argument is that I should have known it was one of the hardest shrine bosses, then your example of this is a castle (you know ... the ending area of the game which is obviously going to be difficult), but then you say I'm whining for saying that the game should tell me how hard it is? I'm not even saying it should, I am LITERALLY EXPLAINING why I went in not knowing it was one of the most difficult shrines. You can't say something equivalent to "you're stupid why didn't you know it was hard?" and then call me a whiner for explaining why. How does that work? 

I'm convinced that you don't even know what's being talked about in this conversation. I didn't die to the boss in the shrine. I just left the shrine after trying for a long time. And my entire arsenal was gone.

What, re-read my post.

I'm saying the game TOLD you by you learning. You went in and say Major or Modest. Then when you couldn't beat the guardian, you learned that you are not ready for whatever difficulty that was. That is the game freaking telling you. Learning by doing. One of this games biggest bonuses. there is like zero tutorial. Hell even then tutorial plateau is pretty barebones on teaching. You learn by doing. You learned that was a shrine out of your current league. Would you feel better if a pop up paused the game to tell you that this shrine is hard? Would that make you feel better?

And no, you did not leave without dying and weaponless. You would not be able to save while fighting, the door locks behind you once you enter the arena. So either you died and reloaded at the shrine entrance, an earlier save or you reloaded before you died, which again woudl be at those two points. You would have all the weapons you had when you entered the shrine. Don't lie. You can't leave the battle shrines ones you start the fight. The door locks behind you.



irstupid said:

And no, you did not leave without dying and weaponless. You would not be able to save while fighting, the door locks behind you once you enter the arena. So either you died and reloaded at the shrine entrance, an earlier save or you reloaded before you died, which again woudl be at those two points. You would have all the weapons you had when you entered the shrine. Don't lie. You can't leave the battle shrines ones you start the fight. The door locks behind you.

Wasn't the argument of Wyrdness that you could leave battle whenever you want in Breath of the Wild? ....  WHAT 

LMAO

Welp, guess he's wrong. I was taking his word for it because I haven't played in a while. So much for that point haha. 

By the way, my point really isn't dependent on whether someone dies or not. In fact since you haven't said a single point in favor of weapon durability (your entire contribution has basically been to call me a whiner and stupid) then I would say this has been a pretty pointless endeavor on your part. 



AngryLittleAlchemist said:
irstupid said:

And no, you did not leave without dying and weaponless. You would not be able to save while fighting, the door locks behind you once you enter the arena. So either you died and reloaded at the shrine entrance, an earlier save or you reloaded before you died, which again woudl be at those two points. You would have all the weapons you had when you entered the shrine. Don't lie. You can't leave the battle shrines ones you start the fight. The door locks behind you.

Wasn't the argument of Wyrdness that you could leave battle whenever you want in Breath of the Wild? ....  WHAT 

LMAO

Welp, guess he's wrong. I was taking his word for it because I haven't played in a while. So much for that point haha. 

Only times you can't are Shrines tests of strength and boss battles.

But why are you making fun of him for being wrong? You were wrong as well. You stated you fought till you ran out of weapons and couldn't' kill, then left and was weaponless. You are a liar. Wyrdness probably forgot that you can't run from like a dozen encounters in the whole game.



Around the Network
irstupid said:
AngryLittleAlchemist said:

Wasn't the argument of Wyrdness that you could leave battle whenever you want in Breath of the Wild? ....  WHAT 

LMAO

Welp, guess he's wrong. I was taking his word for it because I haven't played in a while. So much for that point haha. 

Only times you can't are Shrines tests of strength and boss battles.

But why are you making fun of him for being wrong? You were wrong as well. You stated you fought till you ran out of weapons and couldn't' kill, then left and was weaponless. You are a liar. Wyrdness probably forgot that you can't run from like a dozen encounters in the whole game.

Wait so Wyrdness conveniently just "forgot" but then you call me a liar? I'm talking about something that happened in July of 2017. Almost two years ago. I haven't played the game since like January of 2018 and I hadn't even gotten to any combat shrine because I was restarting the game. I'm not even "making fun of him", lmao, I'm just saying it's funny that it wasn't correct. Coming from the person who called me a whiner that's rich dude. 



AngryLittleAlchemist said:
irstupid said:

And no, you did not leave without dying and weaponless. You would not be able to save while fighting, the door locks behind you once you enter the arena. So either you died and reloaded at the shrine entrance, an earlier save or you reloaded before you died, which again woudl be at those two points. You would have all the weapons you had when you entered the shrine. Don't lie. You can't leave the battle shrines ones you start the fight. The door locks behind you.

Wasn't the argument of Wyrdness that you could leave battle whenever you want in Breath of the Wild? ....  WHAT 

LMAO

Welp, guess he's wrong. I was taking his word for it because I haven't played in a while. So much for that point haha. 

By the way, my point really isn't dependent on whether someone dies or not. In fact since you haven't said a single point in favor of weapon durability (your entire contribution has basically been to call me a whiner and stupid) then I would say this has been a pretty pointless endeavor on your part. 

Wasn't trying to argue for weapon durability. All I was pointing out to you was that the game is not broken for putting you in an impossible to win situation in an open world game. I wouldn't be surprised if you are the guy I saw complaining in the Xenoblade 2 game about level 90+ enemies in the first starting area.

As you keep ignoring RE2 and its limited ammo. If you run guns a blazing in that game, you will run into impossible boss fights cause you won't have enough ammo to kill boss. Same with this game. Irregardless if you like the durability or not, the system exists. THUS you need to keep that in mind. If you come upon an enemy that appears to be tough, you better be equipped. Nice thing about this game, you can stock up and come back. In RE2, you may have screwed your whole game. 

Besides, you were probably on normal mode right? What weak weapons did you have. I could understand running out of weapons on Master Mode when they heal their health back, but it doesn't take too much to take out any of the guardians. Especially if you have guardian weapons, which there were other easier shrines on that path before hand that you should have one for that test.



irstupid said:
AngryLittleAlchemist said:

Wasn't the argument of Wyrdness that you could leave battle whenever you want in Breath of the Wild? ....  WHAT 

LMAO

Welp, guess he's wrong. I was taking his word for it because I haven't played in a while. So much for that point haha. 

By the way, my point really isn't dependent on whether someone dies or not. In fact since you haven't said a single point in favor of weapon durability (your entire contribution has basically been to call me a whiner and stupid) then I would say this has been a pretty pointless endeavor on your part. 

Wasn't trying to argue for weapon durability. All I was pointing out to you was that the game is not broken for putting you in an impossible to win situation in an open world game. I wouldn't be surprised if you are the guy I saw complaining in the Xenoblade 2 game about level 90+ enemies in the first starting area.

As you keep ignoring RE2 and its limited ammo. If you run guns a blazing in that game, you will run into impossible boss fights cause you won't have enough ammo to kill boss. Same with this game. Irregardless if you like the durability or not, the system exists. THUS you need to keep that in mind. If you come upon an enemy that appears to be tough, you better be equipped. Nice thing about this game, you can stock up and come back. In RE2, you may have screwed your whole game. 

So then why are you even arguing? You aren't arguing for weapon durability, you're just saying I did something wrong. I know that, what I'm saying is that the standard for what was "wrong" shouldn't carry over to the next game. This is why I'm frustrated with you and Wyrdness, at this point you guys aren't even discussing whether durability should make a comeback in the next game or not. That's the only thing I've been discussing this entire time. You're just saying I did something wrong. Yes, I know that by the standards of the game I did. I am criticizing the standards.

I didn't ignore RE2, it just isn't a good comparison. Why? Because I wasn't running in swords blazing in that point in the game. In that point in the game, I had stalked up on so many weapons that my entire inventory was either full or nearly full. I had a decent amount of arrows too. But guess what? They weren't enough for the boss. Now, I'll admit I may have had one or two weapons that flat out sucked. Not gonna deny that especially because it's been so long since that happened. But I remember very specifically having many weapons which were high level for that portion of the game. 

The reason why the comparison to RE2 doesn't make sense is because the standards for both games are not the same. One scenario is poor resource management, the other is having all the resources in the world but they don't account for much because of durability. Do you see why that comparison is flawed? Hypothetically, if you had the maximum amount of bullets you could carry in RE2, and that still wasn't enough to beat a boss, I'm pretty sure most people would be pissed at the game and would say that the health of enemies is too overblown. Well, that's basically what happened in BOTW, but because people are such a fan of the game the weapon durability mechanic goes by totally excused. 

Also, I was writing something to Wyrdness about the RE2 comparison and I've already written on the comparison many times, so I don't know how I'm ignoring it. It's just not a good comparison. I'm not going to argue against multiple people at once, so the more you waste time calling me a whiner the less I'm going to respond to him.  



AngryLittleAlchemist said:
irstupid said:

Wasn't trying to argue for weapon durability. All I was pointing out to you was that the game is not broken for putting you in an impossible to win situation in an open world game. I wouldn't be surprised if you are the guy I saw complaining in the Xenoblade 2 game about level 90+ enemies in the first starting area.

As you keep ignoring RE2 and its limited ammo. If you run guns a blazing in that game, you will run into impossible boss fights cause you won't have enough ammo to kill boss. Same with this game. Irregardless if you like the durability or not, the system exists. THUS you need to keep that in mind. If you come upon an enemy that appears to be tough, you better be equipped. Nice thing about this game, you can stock up and come back. In RE2, you may have screwed your whole game. 

So then why are you even arguing? You aren't arguing for weapon durability, you're just saying I did something wrong. I know that, what I'm saying is that the standard for what was "wrong" shouldn't carry over to the next game. This is why I'm frustrated with you and Wyrdness, at this point you guys aren't even discussing whether durability should make a comeback in the next game or not. That's the only thing I've been discussing this entire time. You're just saying I did something wrong. Yes, I know that by the standards of the game I did. I am criticizing the standards.

I didn't ignore RE2, it just isn't a good comparison. Why? Because I wasn't running in swords blazing in that point in the game. In that point in the game, I had stalked up on so many weapons that my entire inventory was either full or nearly full. I had a decent amount of arrows too. But guess what? They weren't enough for the boss. Now, I'll admit I may have had one or two weapons that flat out sucked. Not gonna deny that especially because it's been so long since that happened. But I remember very specifically having many weapons which were high level for that portion of the game. 

The reason why the comparison to RE2 doesn't make sense is because the standards for both games are not the same. One scenario is poor resource management, the other is having all the resources in the world but they don't account for much because of durability. Do you see why that comparison is flawed? Hypothetically, if you had the maximum amount of bullets you could carry in RE2, and that still wasn't enough to beat a boss, I'm pretty sure most people would be pissed at the game and would say that the health of enemies is too overblown. Well, that's basically what happened in BOTW, but because people are such a fan of the game the weapon durability mechanic goes by totally excused. 

Also, I was writing something to Wyrdness about the RE2 comparison and I've already written on the comparison many times, so I don't know how I'm ignoring it. It's just not a good comparison. I'm not going to argue against multiple people at once, so the more you waste time calling me a whiner the less I'm going to respond to him.  

Unless you were on Master Mode, you had weak weapons. One average Claymore can probably take down that guardian. 

At that point in the game you probably thought that flame sword was top tier. That flame sword is not even worth picking up. It doesn't matter if RE2 has limited resources for the whole game, or not. Point remains. In RE2 you can run into situations where you came ill-prepared. THat is what happened in BotW. You entered ill-prepared. Do you want the game to run a test before you enter and a pop up goin "you don't have good enough weapons to beat this shrine" 

Durability is fine and I hope it stays. I wouldn't mind if they increased teh durability to say double, but it brings versatility, and makes you try new things in and out of battle. Ignoring fights, trying to kill without using weapons. Sneaking. comboing weaposn together, ect. If the weapons never broke, the game would be insanely boring imo. People would just go run to a linux, lightning arrow them to have them drop their weapon and then bam, they have some 112 power club to go and kill everything easy peezy. Why use other weapons, the weapon would own. Grab an ice spear and use that non-stop and game broken. Or use ice wand, freeze group of enemies and hurricane in with overpowered lynal club.



 

irstupid said:
AngryLittleAlchemist said:

So then why are you even arguing? You aren't arguing for weapon durability, you're just saying I did something wrong. I know that, what I'm saying is that the standard for what was "wrong" shouldn't carry over to the next game. This is why I'm frustrated with you and Wyrdness, at this point you guys aren't even discussing whether durability should make a comeback in the next game or not. That's the only thing I've been discussing this entire time. You're just saying I did something wrong. Yes, I know that by the standards of the game I did. I am criticizing the standards.

I didn't ignore RE2, it just isn't a good comparison. Why? Because I wasn't running in swords blazing in that point in the game. In that point in the game, I had stalked up on so many weapons that my entire inventory was either full or nearly full. I had a decent amount of arrows too. But guess what? They weren't enough for the boss. Now, I'll admit I may have had one or two weapons that flat out sucked. Not gonna deny that especially because it's been so long since that happened. But I remember very specifically having many weapons which were high level for that portion of the game. 

The reason why the comparison to RE2 doesn't make sense is because the standards for both games are not the same. One scenario is poor resource management, the other is having all the resources in the world but they don't account for much because of durability. Do you see why that comparison is flawed? Hypothetically, if you had the maximum amount of bullets you could carry in RE2, and that still wasn't enough to beat a boss, I'm pretty sure most people would be pissed at the game and would say that the health of enemies is too overblown. Well, that's basically what happened in BOTW, but because people are such a fan of the game the weapon durability mechanic goes by totally excused. 

Also, I was writing something to Wyrdness about the RE2 comparison and I've already written on the comparison many times, so I don't know how I'm ignoring it. It's just not a good comparison. I'm not going to argue against multiple people at once, so the more you waste time calling me a whiner the less I'm going to respond to him.  

Unless you were on Master Mode, you had weak weapons. One average Claymore can probably take down that guardian. 

At that point in the game you probably thought that flame sword was top tier. That flame sword is not even worth picking up. It doesn't matter if RE2 has limited resources for the whole game, or not. Point remains. In RE2 you can run into situations where you came ill-prepared. THat is what happened in BotW. You entered ill-prepared. Do you want the game to run a test before you enter and a pop up goin "you don't have good enough weapons to beat this shrine" 

Durability is fine and I hope it stays. I wouldn't mind if they increased teh durability to say double, but it brings versatility, and makes you try new things in and out of battle. Ignoring fights, trying to kill without using weapons. Sneaking. comboing weaposn together, ect. If the weapons never broke, the game would be insanely boring imo. People would just go run to a linux, lightning arrow them to have them drop their weapon and then bam, they have some 112 power club to go and kill everything easy peezy. Why use other weapons, the weapon would own. Grab an ice spear and use that non-stop and game broken. Or use ice wand, freeze group of enemies and hurricane in with overpowered lynal club.

I feel like by now my own answers are being used against me Like when I explained why I didn't know the Test of Strength was the hardest combat shrine and that was called "whining". But ehh ... I don't think you mean it maliciously right now To answer your question: While the flame sword was one of the better weapons, I did not really rely on it that much, as I had a couple of other weapons that outranked it. I only mentioned it because someone (I think you? Can't remember) asked if I followed a path to a treasure chest. And that was the quest I remember doing early on in the game that was similar to what said person described. That might not be the quest they were talking about though because I think that quest begins at the Dueling Peak Stable. 

An average Claymore can take down the highest level combat guardian ... or are we still arguing as if I was going up against a modest? Let me just put as a reminder I'm talking about a Test of Strength. I don't think "one" Traveler's or a Soldier's Claymore could take out a Test of Strength guardian. Maybe I'll check that out when I eventually restart the game. 

Well I actually was going to mention that, I already have a comment typed out for Wyrdness on this example. While I agree both scenarios can be basically summarized as a lack of "preparation", it is the specifics I have a problem with. Especially because Wyrdness kept specifying the point about resource management. The scenario in BOTW is not really an example of bad resource management, it is an example of bad resources. However yes both can very be attributed to a lack of preparation and that I will admit - my point is that I prefer preparation in action adventure games to be based on your skill level, more so than a durability mechanic. That might just be where we differ and that's fine. 

To some extent I don't know which camp I fall in more : no durability or just more durability. I think I would say for now the first option, but I'm open to the second.