| Normchacho said: Of course there is stuff to do, I never said there wasn't. But, again, compared to other open world games it's pretty empty. You also act like this is the only game with more than one way to get around. Which certainly isn't the case. The issue isn't just that there's a lot of space between things to do though. You could have a world with the same amount of open space, but if it's filled with a diverse array of scenery and life, it's going to be more interesting to travel through. From what we've seen so far, the open spaces in BotW are pretty baren. I'm watching a section of the Treehouse where he's running through woods, and even this is pretty empty. There are certainly more trees, but animal life is still pretty rare, and there isn't much in the way of underbrush. Things like that could make the spaces in between actual things to do more interesting. I also didn't say Zelda had bad game design. Because it also doesn't have a realistic world. Like I said, you don't spend hours climbing mountains, you don't have to walk/ride for miles to reach objectives, you have to stop and sleep for several hours each day. I'm saying that game worlds are made to be enjoyable, not realistic, so saying that it's a bad thing to have a dense world because it isn't realistic is silly. |
I already explained why it seems empty. It is much larger scaled. That doesn't necessarily mean there is less to do, or that the world is worse off for it. How about you compare Zelda U to Uncharted or Far Cry 4. Other action-adventure semi/open-world games. The environment density is similar. Why? Because the focus of these games is exploration, because they aren't RPGs.
And no I didn't act like there aren't other methods of transportation in open world RPGs. But they are still vastly more limiting. The open-world games with the best transportation methods are all action-adventure games (i.e Far Cry 3/4, Uncharted, etc.) In a role-playing game you might have a horse just so you can get from point A to point B faster. And then there is always a method of fast travel. This isn't true for action-adventure games though. The point of transportation is so that you can access places you couldn't access without these methods.
There is a balance. For a game that focuses on exploration there has to be a "sense of realism" not perfect 1:1 realism. For a role-playing game that doesn't focus on exploration (some do - like the Elder Scrolls Series) the "sense of realism" is less important.
Again, it all comes down to the genres you are comparing.
Compare Far Cry 4 (generally considered one of the best open-world games) to Zelda. How dense is that world?
