By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
sc94597 on 14 June 2016
Edit Thread
Normchacho said:

 

Wyrdness said:

You're not getting the point, you're saying that it has less wildlife running around or what not but that is made up by the sheer number of activities you're doing, the game doesn't need what you're complaining about, those trees you're talking about for example all can be cut down for resources or picked for fruits that grow back, this is something other open world games that have what you say don't feature. In one part of the stream they cut a Skeleton enemy's arm off and picked it up as a weapon and kept it, in another they lit a small fire and the wind caused it to spread and burn down an enemy camp, in another they used their shield as a snow board sliding off a cliff then gliding and latching on to the mountain opposite while another part they vaulted off the horse used the glider to maneuvre in mid air then fire arrows to take down a mini boss that they encountered while exploring.

The new Zelda is not the only game to do some of the things it does but having played a load of open world games including recent ones I can't think of one that does eveything I seen it does in one package with out the use of mods, you're arguning one major thing across all games which is fair enough but from the stream the are a tonne of little things in the new Zelda under the surface that make up a far bigger picture.

Alright, lets get this done in one post since the replies were going to be pretty similar anyways.

1. Uncharted is not an open/semi-open world game. Not by any stretch. ND calls 4 "Wide linear" but that's very different from the types of game we're talking about.

2. Pick an argument. Either it's not empty compared to other open world games, or it's okay that it's empty compared to other open world games. You can't have both. The latter, mind you, I agree with. It's fine that the world isn't quite as fleshed out as other games. I'm sure it will still be a great game.

3. The only thing I'm arguing is that when someone says "World seems a little empty" they are making a valid point. That is a valid criticism of what we've seen so far. So when you bring up things like "wait wait wait! But, you can snowboard! aaannndd you can pick fruit!...aaannnddd...an empty world is more realistic!" none of that matters. If the actual world the game is played in isn't as full or lively as the world of most other modern open world games, it's emptier. The why doesn't matter.

4. Far Cry 4 is a terrible example to try and prove your point. First of; There are so, so, so, many ways to get around in that game, and secondly; the game is way more lively that what we've seen of BotW. Like...way, way more lively.

5. It may not seem like it, but I'm actually really excited for this game. But it's not infalible, and we need to stop acting like anyone who isn't 100% over the moon over every second of footage is biased or ignorant.

1. And Zelda is very different from something like The Witcher 3 which consists of five instanced zones (albeit big ones.) So if we are going to compare apples to oranges, why not oranges to grapes? One would expect a  "Wide linear" game to have a greater density than an open-world one anyway. 

2. I already mentioned how this is a false dichotomy. And I compared it to other open-world games of the same genre, which are still acclaimed for being open-world. 

3. Except they aren't. Having fewer deer and not having towns every hundred feet does not make the game empty. There are plenty of alternative things to do and see in the game between point A. and B. 

4. Having played Far Cry 4 hundreds of hours and from what I've seen of 5 hours of Zelda, I disagree. It is an apt comparison. You don't have settlements every few hundred feet in Far Cry 4. You need to travel long distances to get action. Also there  are just as many transporation methods (from what we've seen) in Zelda as well: sail-cloth, raft, horse, climbing, etc. 

5. Who is doing that? It seemed clear to me that people were calling the game empty without seeing the various things one could do in the treehouse and the means of travel. Obviously if the game were empty, we wouldn't have seen 5 hours of gameplay in just 2% of the overworld consisting of so many different things to do. If I think "empty" I think of a game like Twilight Princess. Definitely not this game. Now if one wants to say it is "emptier" than RPG's sure, I might agree. But that doesn't necessarily mean it is better or worse.