Slimebeast said:
But grass on fire, different weather zones, dynamic enemies etc, aren't those features much like those who developerss like Ubisoft and others pride themselves with? Tons of gimmicky features that are kind of cool but really don't add to the depth of the game. I'm not trying to downplay. I love features like that and I do think they add depth (so why did I just claim they don't add depth? I don't know lol). Thanks for giving some examples. I avoid videos and articles because I want to explore the game myself and basically not know anything beforehand, but it's extremely exciting to hear that Zelda has been given this kind of detail and life to its world. But, and it's a huge but. I'm afraid that like with many other big games these features won't have any real meaning. What I mean is that with just one difficulty level (damn you Assassin's Creed), the game will naturally be designed for the lowest common denominator (a mass market casual gamer) which means a core gamer can just rush through the game without having to utilize these beneficial features. Like with Assassin's Creed. Especially during the Revelations era, the AC games had tons of cool features (countless upgrades and special equipment, environmental assistance, a strategy layer, mini-games and so on), but since the game was so damn easy, a player could rush through it by only using the basic attacks and moves, and ignore all the cool stuff. Which was really sad and made me angry and frustrated. I want to have access to a hard difficulty level where it's practically impossible to beat the game if you don't pay attention to and utilize the features. |
Well, i've played the demo on gamescom and it looks like Zelda will be way different from a typical Ubi world game. Most importantly, having played tons of open world games, Breath of the Wild actually feels fresh and great, way better than i had expected. Nad quite different from other Zeldas.







