| Wyrdness said: Being used to something doesn't mean its a good staple the structure in the series was a limitation as if you removed the dungeons from all the previous games only SS and maybe WW would have some semblance of what makes it good the rest would be pointless this is why the structure had to be overhauled as the dungeons were the games Hyrule was just a stop between them. In BOTW Hyrule now is the game the player now no longer needs to get to a dungeon to enjoy the concept of the adventure or require a said item to open up and progress the game they are given a definitive adventure in which the structure lets the player themselves dictate how the game plays out in the world. That is what imo makes BOTW the best Zelda game as now it feels much more like a proper true adventure within Hyrule where you organically come across villages, shrines and such in a quest to find a solution to the problem as opposed to a sort of dungeon crawler where you're guided from A-B due to a limited structure and the world outside doesn't really matter. |
That's something Ocarina of Time is guilty of, and frankly I'm not that fond of it in the grand scheme of things. I've said that Ocarina of Time hasn't aged well, and probably Hyrule being the empty map that connects dungeons plays a part. But Majora's Mask's Termina has personality, and so does Wind Waker's waterworld, leaving their dungeons aside. A perfectly enjoyable world can be build through standard Zelda's 3D structure, and those games are good examples (incidentally, my two favourite 3D Zelda games).
Breath of the Wild features an adventure that follows a different structure than the aforemented mentioned games, and I guess my expectations played a part on why it felt so different from the other games. Apparently it follows the original Zelda structure as some of the users in this thread have said, so now I'm curious to try that one out and see.
Essay Pro