Yes. Yes, please. This. So much this. At least half of my screenshots on my switch are just BoTW recepies and at one point I seriously considered having a second twitter just for recepies.

Your thread title makes me uncomfortable.

Meh, not the hardest to make something decent. Read the descriptions on the food and by the time your even halfway leveled up your food will be maxing your stats easy.

What I did though was just go online, find the best recipes for each thing I wanted and copy them. Then I never used my last one of each recipe ever. That way I could just go over ot the item when I was running low on them and hover on it where it showed items in recipe. Make a dozen more and go on my way.

You clearly do not have obsessive collective tendecies! XD

I also did that 'not use the last of great dish' thing though.  A lot of the time things will result in the same dish, but with more hearts or an extra effect on the dish as well, wich gives a range of variantion inbetween that all work more or less. I'd like to be able to save at least my favourite recepies and have them easily searchable and accessible.

Beg to differ, thus why I would prefer to not have it.

I don't want to have to fill out the entire recipe book just for completion sake, like I did for the photo book.

But just the sheer number of ingrediants and how they can essentially make the same dish just a slight slight difference would make that recipe book like 10,000+ recipes. Feel like it might be more annoying than helpful. I mean you have a possibility of using 2-5 ingredients. There are like 300 different ingredients one can use. Don't even want to do the math, but its a freaking lot of possibilities that will get you something that isn't junk.

I'm thinking the best thing they could do would be to let you favorite like say 5-10 recipes and theres a book or something for only those favorites.

I never worry about food much. Easy enough to stay alive, maybe master mode will change that. But I just have my favorites saved as I said (not totally consumed) and hten whenever a blood moon happens I quickly get to cooking spot and cook as many of those favorites as I can. By the time a next blood moon I either have more ingredients to do again or still had some left from last time. Can only make so many in the blood moon bonus time.

All I want is a Link x Sidon and a Zelda x Urbosa cutscene.

Can't really ask for a double date, cause ya know

I hate the quote system here, so I will do it like this.

It's not a wrong comparison. You could perhaps argue that about Suikoden 3 (although it is still arguable because a lot of DLC is developed during the initial development period along with the rest of the game. And some content does not appear to be extra, but part of the original plan, but cut out and sold back to us in pieces simply because now they can do that, etc) but not for Resident Evil 4 and Devil May Cry 3. The original version of RE4 did not have Ada's "Separate Ways" story segment. It was first added in the PS2 version, that came after the GameCube version. This is the kind of thing they could charge you extra for, or give you for free, through DLC, if only the infrastructure for DLC was in place back then. But it wasn't. And the original version of Devil May Cry 3 did not have Vergil's story path. It was added in the Special Edition of the game that came out 1 year later. If this was done today, Vergil's story could have been added as DLC. But back then they had to release a physical version.

 It is a wrong comparison. For starters, it is not even a comparable genre with the games you mentioned. Wow, you can play as different characters in Street Fighter, it doesn’t mean a thing. In Zelda games, you play as a single character. That is how it has consistently been. Second, you’re comparing two different era’s. Most games had either unlockables, cheats, or would stay as is. Even then, forcing gamers to play as other characters was a hit or miss. As I said, Halo 2 is an example. People like Master Chief so much (you could compare with Link) that they absolutely hated the “alien dude” parts. Same was even said about the most recent iteration. You cannot tell me if people actually liked playing other characters besides Dante. My gut feeling says no.

And where exactly did I say that this would automatically be a good thing? I did not. Because of a thing called different taste. What's good for one person is not necessarily good for someone else. But this is what I want.

 If I go to Zeldainformer, arguably the biggest Zelda fan site, and look at their polling data that they do every year, most fans don’t want to play as anyone other than Link. And that means male Link specifically.

Yes, those people. I'm just saying I don't know if I'd refer to "Legend of Zelda is a game where you play as Link. Not Zelda" as something simple, since the confusion surrounding it has become a meme. But it is what it is.

 Those people probably don’t buy the games. The title argument is dumb. There are many games with titles that don’t include the main character’s name.

Though I mainly said it due to the irony of it. I understand why you can't play as a Metroid in Metroid. But Zelda is (usually) a capable character who could pick up a weapon, and has a triforce, can some times wield magic, etc. Back in the 80's and 90's there was an even bigger stigma in regards to female protagonists, or even strong women in gaming, so you more often than not saw them relegated to being the damsel in distress.

 Oh no. Please don’t be that person. My dude, almost everything in Zelda is gynocentric. The royalty is female, their religion has female deities, there is an all female race, the horse is female, there is an all female warrior tribe, many companions were female, even the damned sword has a female spirit inside it. There is no lack of female representation in the franchise. Zelda hasn’t been weak character since years. The only thing is, she is not a warrior. Link is the warrior. The game mechanics around that arctype is literally what makes the game. If they made Zelda a warrior princess that does everything Link does, then what would the point of Link be in the game. Aonuma literally said the same thing.

But while the stigma isn't completely gone, the market is a lot more receptive towards female characters today. And in a game called Legend of Zelda, it would be interesting if she could finally make a proper debut.

 You want to fuck up a classic, popular, iconic, successful dynamic from a popular franchise for what? Female equality? Just no.

As for Spirit Tracks, yeah I'm not saying that's a game where we get to play as Zelda in the capacity people want. You could control her (even before she became a ghost), but only as a companion to Link. I want them to take it one step further.

 I’m really not going to argue Spirit Tracks further. She is a game mechanic (not even a good one), nothing more.

You don't consider Link's story in BotW already resolved, to the point where a story expansion focusing on him is necessary?

 Ofcourse. The Yiga clan still exists for example. But ask yourself, if Link has nothing to do, then what does Zelda have to do? If Link’s story is concluded, hers is also concluded.

You can always add more story with expansions, but that doesn't mean that the original story in the original game didn't have a satisfying beginning, middle and end. That includes open ended inconclusive endings, when they're supposed to be. The ending to Inception (movie) for example. Even if they now give us 20 minutes more showing what happened after, the original story was still a complete story, because it was supposed to end in a way that left the audience guessing.

 How does this justify shifting the story to Zelda exactly?

So with that said, you still believe that the original BotW Link story was inconclusive, and that Nintendo are charging people extra for the conclusion? I don't imagine Nintendo would do that.

 Again, if Link has nothing left to do, than Zelda also has nothing to do. Shifting to her makes no sense to the entirety of the game. You would build all this gear, skill, health, stamina etc. for nothing if it would change to Zelda and Zelda’s wacky adventures of whatever that imaginative DLC would be.

If Zelda could get a spinoff game featuring her, that would be great. I'd prefer that.

 Ding Ding Ding. Yes. Spinoff. Not mainline thank you.

But the thing is she hasn't so far. One problem with an entire game focused on a side character or side story is that it is more risky/less cost efficient than just injecting a smaller portion of a story into an already finished game engine, with all the assets available, etc.

 That would still stand. You have two issues: Waste resources on a questionable content choice that may or may not be successful and true to the formula of the game with everyone already invested in a different character, or you could make a less costly, smaller, but NEW spin-off. Nintendo would do the latter, or none at all. The first option would be a slap in the face of both groups (IE: Why doesn’t Zelda get her own game or why can’t I play as my Link) If they don’t, then whatever.

So you know, it's been many years coming. A smaller DLC is a safer gamble than an entire game. She was at the center of the promotional image for the DLC so I hoped we'd finally get a story focused on her. The namesake of the title. But apparently there's a different promotional image for the DLC featuring Link, and it's not like I had high expectations for this. Which is why I didn't say that this is what I expected, but rather what I wanted.

The promotional artwork means nothing. The DLC was already confirmed to be Link only, which is good. Also, the namesake thing is really a non-issue. You play don’t play as Donkey Kong in the Country sequels either, so it means nothing.