Hynad said:
The whole is much more than the sum of its part? |
Synergy.... i believe would be the right word to what he means
Nope. OOT was to 3D gaming adventures what SMB was to 2D platformers. Being the "first" is always going to be a bigger deal. But that doesn't mean this new game won't be legendary in it's own right. But there's no way it'll be as innovative. It's impossible.
A Link to the Past was the most important Zelda. The best Zelda? That's always difficult to determine. New things are often better than old things but they aren't as memorable or a revolutionary so they aren't as touted or placed on a pedestal. Tolkien, for example--if LotR was released today for the first time, it would get a lot more criticism and a lot less praise. I doubt it would crack many "best fantasy novels ever" lists.
BotW might be the best Zelda yet when compared directly to older games but I haven't seen anything revolutionary about it. Looks to be a good open world game that builds on what other open world games have done.
| kljesta64 said: oot was a giant leap in the action adventure genre i dont see that in botw ..but still if its a well balanced open world, which is my biggest concern, i dont see why not.. no matter how great oot is it simply cant stay n1 forever. |
It could easily stay number 1 as far as innovative Zelda's go. Unless VR takes off or we find a brand new way to play games, I don't see how another Zelda can be more innovative.
Nah, OoT and FF7 are highly praised because they revolutionized the gaming industry (first properly designed 3d games). Nothing abt BoTW is trully new to the gaming industry
For me, easily since it was never on my throne. I think people put too much stock in being the first at something, and as long as that mindset never changes, OoT will always be seen as the holy grail by many.
| Einsam_Delphin said: For me, easily since it was never on my throne. I think people put too much stock in being the first at something, and as long as that mindset never changes, OoT will always be seen as the holy grail by many. |
My thoughts exactly.
Hynad said:
The whole is much more than the sum of its part? |
Hmm, I thought it was a common phrase in English too. Anyway, what I mean is that what's important isn't only individual features but also how different parts of a game interact which each other. This is especially visible in many open world games, where there's a ton of features but they have very little interaction with each other, leaving the game to feel like a set of distinct features instead of a whole. In other words, a lot of open world games miss the forest for the trees.
Zkuq said:
Hmm, I thought it was a common phrase in English too. Anyway, what I mean is that what's important isn't only individual features but also how different parts of a game interact which each other. This is especially visible in many open world games, where there's a ton of features but they have very little interaction with each other, leaving the game to feel like a set of distinct features instead of a whole. In other words, a lot of open world games miss the forest for the trees. |
Well, I don't know if it's a common phrase of not... But the way I see it, a whole IS a sum of parts.
But with that explanation, I understand what you mean. And I agree.
Zkuq said:
Hmm, I thought it was a common phrase in English too. Anyway, what I mean is that what's important isn't only individual features but also how different parts of a game interact which each other. This is especially visible in many open world games, where there's a ton of features but they have very little interaction with each other, leaving the game to feel like a set of distinct features instead of a whole. In other words, a lot of open world games miss the forest for the trees. |
It is common. The concept of synergy is used in a lot of places, from businesses to sports teams.
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2024 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
