By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - The Legend of Zelda: BotW Angry Review

BraLoD said:
Shikamo said:

I am e,e

As I said, nobody.

u trash u,u



     


(=^・ω・^=) Kuroneko S2 - Ore no Imouto - SteamMyAnimeList and Twitter - PSN: Gustavo_Valim - Switch FC: 6390-8693-0129 (=^・ω・^=)
Around the Network

Alright, looking through the past few pages, much of the discussion is off topic with some users taking personal jabs. If you guys keep making snide comments at each other and derailing the thread, moderations will be handed out. No excuses.



Hiku said:
Goodnightmoon said:

Just after that he says "or tweaked a little bit so they break less" no he doesn't hate the system, otherways he would not be given the game almost a 10.

The thing about the mindset was already explained to you with the Dark Souls example, is fine if you don't like it, but there is a right mindset to play those games, if you play them wrong you gonna hate them for sure, but that's your choice, he didn't loved the system but clearly didn't really disliked it nearly as much as Jim claimed (he made it sound like a gamebreaking issue which is ridiculous), and certainly, he didn't hated it, he just prefer other systems and that's fine.

I never labeled his opinion of it as hate. I even pointed out exactly what I was refering to.
I specifically talked about having a problem with it. Because those were your choice of words in the quote I replied to.
"the problem is to play the game with the wrong mindset. "

Joe has a problem with it. To the point where he said he "wishes it wasn't in the game". It's safe to deduce that this means he didn't like it. Just how much he disliked it is not for me to determine. Nor did I try to do so at any point.

The Souls game example I already replied to. But either way, it doesn't explain your statement. Because you made a generalized claim. To water down the issues anyone may have with the system to them simply having the "wrong mindset" is very presumptous.
That's attempting to delegitimize proper critique as nothing more than an error of the player.

Someone who has given a game mechanic a fair chance, understood and analyzed it with the proper mindset, can still have problems with things that you or I don't have a problem with. That's just how different taste works.

It doesn't sound like he hated it as much as Jim Sterling, no. But that's not what I was saying. I was saying that I can understand some people having legitimate problems with just about any game mechanic, including this one. And your comment suggested that this is not the case, and as long as everyone approached it with the right mindset, there's no problem. But that's not how different taste works.

Some people can have legitimate problems with the system, of course they can, in my opinion most problems comes from going with a wrong mindset, hoping the game plays like a totally different game insted of adapting to its style of gameplay, however, no, I wouldn't say every problem everyone has with the system is their fault, it doesn't, the balance of the system is not in the sweet spot for everyone, some think it should be less punishing, and while I disagree because to me worked perfectly, I can totally see why some people can have some problems with it, and there is some room from improvement too, in fact, if they balanced the game in a way the weapons last twice as they do I think less people would have problems adapting to this sytem and the game would still mantain its particular style.

Then there is of course the possibility that you just hated this kind of systems with all your soul, which is fine too, but I think it would be too arrogant from those to call it bad design, because it can be perfectly argued why it isn't, if you want to get attached to weapons on a game that clearly doesn't want you to get attached to them, its kind of your fault, that doesn't mean you don't have reasons to dislike it, but is not really the games problem.



I'm glad to see that in spite of the bs Joe faces from Nintendo, he gave it a very honest and unbiased review.

The few nitpicks and negatives he has - I easily overlook those because of my own tastes, but I understand them.

It's refreshing to see someone totally new to the Zelda franchise actually review it.



I predict NX launches in 2017 - not 2016

Hiku said:
Goodnightmoon said:

Some people can have legitimate problems with the system, of course they can, in my opinion most of this problems comes from going with a wrong mindset, hoping the game plays like a totally different game insted of adapting to its style of gameplay, however, no, I wouldn't say every problem everyone has with the system is their fault, it doesn't, the balance of the system is not in the sweet spot for everyone, some think it should be less punishing, and while I disagree because to me worked perfectly, I can totally see why some people can have some problems with it, and there is some room from improvement too, in fact, if they balanced the game in a way the weapons last twice as they do I think less people would have that problem adapting to this sytem and the game would still mantain its particular style.

If you say it like that, that you think "most" of the issues come from approaching it the wrong way, then that's pefectly fine.
And I may be inclined to agree after playing the game, even if I personally may end up finding it more annoying than rewarding.

The way you worded it at first, it comes off as more generalized and absolute. Basically "If someone doesn't like this, they're just wrong because they made a mistake."

Having said that, and not having played the game, but listening to how people described the weapon durability system, I was wondering if something like "durability regeneration" could alleviate the problems some people have with it, while still satisfying people who enjoy being forced to rotate weapons.

It would basically work this way: Once the durability goes down, it slowly starts to regenerate very slowly. If you ever reach 0, the weapon will break. But if you stop right before 0, and switch to another weapon, you can keep your favorite weapons. While conciously chosing to break weapons you're ok with replacing.

Durability regenaration is what happens with the Master Sword, it breaks, but then it regenerates itself after a period of time, that makes it feel special.

Your system could work, it doesn't sound horrible, it still makes you act in a kind of strategic and creative way to solve problems but I don't think it will work as well, you see, in this game i'm often hoping to break a weapon because that means I have space for another, because i'm constantly finding cool weapons and many times I just don't have enough space for them, so that makes me want to use them more instead of keeping them to myself for the future.

Now, the game kind of forced me to think this way, but the thing is I enjoyed it way more because of it, I learned that weapons are like amunnition, when you want to save this ammunition you start to play with all the options the game gives you, making combats more variad, strategic and interesting, and I feel constantly rewarded for the new weapons I'm getting to play with, sometimes is a bad ass giant boomerang, other times is a sword that electrocutes the enemies, other times is just a freaking broom, but if they didn't break, I would just use the strongest ones because feels like the logic thing to do and probably I wouldn't even catch the ones with lower attack power, however, since they break and I know the game is designed with this in mind, I feel free to try them all, which makes the game feels more playful.

With your system not only the Master sword would feel less special but also people would just keep the strongest ones and constantly switch them in a way none of them breaks, it would actually change the way people plays it and probably it would require a different balance.



Around the Network

How about we quit arguing with people who have not played the game about weapon durability.

That would be great.



Shiken said:
I have said it many times before. This game will likely win GotY and is shaping up to be a contender for game of the gen.

All the hate is coming from people who are mad because deep down they want to play the game, but won't because it is Nintendo and they don't want a WiiU or Switch. That said, they are trying to justify their decision to not buy it by trying to make the game look bad...pathetic really.

Sour grapes position.  It's the flipside to the buyers remorse position we saw with No Man's Sky defenders.  Very interesting to see it play out, especially for a psyche major.  :)



"You should be banned. Youre clearly flaming the president and even his brother who you know nothing about. Dont be such a partisan hack"

The amount of micro-management really turns me off. If I really felt that it was a near perfect game I would buy a switch right now but it's just...Nintendo games always disappoint compared to their reviews. I mean Skyward Sword got a 93 and that game had me about hurl a Wiimote for all the wrong reasons.



I am Iron Man

Robert_Downey_Jr. said:
The amount of micro-management really turns me off. If I really felt that it was a near perfect game I would buy a switch right now but it's just...Nintendo games always disappoint compared to their reviews. I mean Skyward Sword got a 93 and that game had me about hurl a Wiimote for all the wrong reasons.

Not sure what you mean by micro-management. You mean like cooking food?



KLXVER said:
Robert_Downey_Jr. said:
The amount of micro-management really turns me off. If I really felt that it was a near perfect game I would buy a switch right now but it's just...Nintendo games always disappoint compared to their reviews. I mean Skyward Sword got a 93 and that game had me about hurl a Wiimote for all the wrong reasons.

Not sure what you mean by micro-management. You mean like cooking food?

the constant cycling of weapons seems like it would make inventory management annoying.



I am Iron Man