By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
DakonBlackblade on 07 March 2017
Edit Thread
areason said:
onionberry said:

Not really, open world games these days are static and you can't alter the environment for new gameplay possibilities, the only recent game that does similar stuff like that is watch dogs 2 and is kinda limited. On breath of the wild you can push a rock from the beginning of the game all the way to the final boss (just an example) Yeah I can destroy a table on the witcher 3, but can I use that same table to kill enemies or to float on a river?

Those are all puzzle elements, they don't forever alter the enviorment. Trees go back after being cut down, so do plants and other items. 

It doesn't make it diffrent then other open world games, it's just a specific gameplay feature, just like other games having magic/bases/classes/dialouge options and much more. 

I'm not saying the game doesn't have any unique elements, it just doesn't blow away the open world concept. 

The game trades structure and narrative for freedom, it does it well tough, but it is not the second coming of the messiah that ppl make it sound like it is. In reality it doesn't do anythign new it only does everything realy well. However it has some very glaring issues like a bland super simplistic combat system (its fun but laks a lot of depth), an atrocious inventory management system coupled with an horrible weapon durability system that has you navigating menus way more often than you should be, it also has very bland enemy design (as per Zelda tradition, some ppl will go nuts over this but lets face it, you fight big goblins, some skeleton like things, generic giant spiders and bats, some lizard like things, generic rock golems etc)

As mentioned before it lacks a strong engaging narrative, Im not sure why most open world games can't get this right, Witcher 3 did it perfectly, Horizon did it super well, you don't need to screw your narrative just to give ppl freedom, you can have both . The whole argument that you can just go beat the final boss and thats somehow a plus makes no sense, why the fck would I go and beat the final boss for no reason, just let ppl go around and ofering no structure isn't necessarely a plus, it is nice in the broad sense, but skiping the entire narrative makes no sense no mater how you look at it, its like reading the last page of a book before readin anything else, it just craps on the experience. Not to mention it severely limit what you can acomplish with the storytellin since you cna't have wide twists and turns or the whol thing just crumbles. Also its 2017 and Zelda still doesn't offer a proper character power progression system, this game could benefit imenselly fromm having a level up system and skill tress and whatnot.

If it weren't called Zelda wed be getting much more honest reviews and the game would be around the 85-90 meta range, it is a great game, it is nowhere near as godlike as ppl make it sound tough, both the press and the fans have this enormous mist of glamour regarding anything Zelda, they will always consider the games of this franchise the best thing in the world.