| Johnw1104 said: The only way you can be sure that a game (or film) really are superb is if they're soon accompanied by a surly wave of contrarians attempting to rewrite the narrative lol The game had some flaws (I can certainly think of a few), and a greater diversity of enemies would certainly suit the game, but this is a game that most people played waaaay beyond 40 hours before getting bored of it, and those 40+ hours were incredible. I don't mind the criticism as it introduces some ideas that might make for an even better Zelda next time, but it's ridiculous to try and claim this game was anything but a masterpiece; after all, there's never been a "masterpiece" that couldn't be improved. That's actually why I'm so excited for the next game, as Miyamoto said they'd be able to turn one around faster as they'd re-use the engine. This game was very clearly an introductory attempt to enter a genre that they'd never dabbled in, and they managed to stick the landing unlike just about anyone outside of GTA III. The pieces and framework are all well established, and I fully expect the next sequel to be more focused on additional content and details. |
Good post.
Those claiming this thread is evidence of his point need to realise that the issue is not his opinion, rather his claim that he is objectively correct, he's not.
At the end of the day he doesn't love the game and I do, I think its probably the best game I have ever played, only time will truly tell if it remains so. His opinion is no more reflective of 'fact' than mine just because he wrote a bunch of words on a page, particular when said words smell more than click-baity.
Discussions regarding GOAT are pretty redundant as far as I'm concerned, it's almost impossible to account for the passage of time, but what we do know is that BOTW is almost universally acclaimed. That doesn't mean it is without flaw, but any game that achieves what it does while addressing those flaws is likely to be pretty spectacular.
