| OTBWY said: Well, my response was that whatever RPG's elements they both have, it really doesn't matter because the two games are separate with one being open world and the other linear. That means that whatever RPG elements BotW has, it isn't necessary to beat the game. In Zelda II, it absolutely is needed to beat the game. That is why the RPG part of the argument went that way. The tutorial area argument is a moot point since I already explained that since you can beat the game right after that area. |
I guess I didn't see the distinction to be that abroad between both. Especially when I still feel like they're the two odd entries in the franchise, and with other noticeable similarities despite the strinking different approach to its linearity/non-linearity (The return of Ganon, Zelda's state, regaining lives through sleeping in towns/item usage, attack techniques, overworld being full with towns, citizens and dungeons, optional sidequests for similar rewards, unscripted and avoidable overworld encounters, and some more examples). We're probably looking at these two from different approachs, though.
I should fully play the first Zelda one of these days.
Essay Pro