Pavolink said:
BotW takes a lot from SS. From what I have seen from the multiple replays I've done of SS: - Stamina introduction - A more agile Link - An story where Zelda plays a big role and it's as important (or even more) than Link, up to the point that she even has her own adventure - More open areas and less corridors (like TP) - Higher difficulty - More damage from enemies - Bosses like Ghirahim were there wasn't an obvious weak point and more like real combat - Better use of every tool inside and outside of dungeons - Upgrades, cooking (potions in SS) - Better use of rupees
Those are the ones I remember. This is understable considering Fujibayashi directed both games.
I also have especulated that maybe SS was an open world game (considering the story and dowsing mechanic), but due to the motion controls implementation and lack of power from the Wii made it impossible to make. |
You're right when you mention it.
SS was really the beginning of where the team said "Let's try some new stuff that deviate from the core" - and some of it failed, some of it didn't work as well as it could. But there were a lot of wins with Skyward Sword, and IMO, in spite of its flaws, it gave hope for the franchise as a whole. Link Between Worlds was also a precursor, and this time they did things in a more satisfying way.
I think with motion controls, on paper Zelda seemed like a good idea, but the reality is that precise motion controls are really only good when used indirectly - such as with aiming and such; when it comes to the level of implementation of SS, it came off as more of a hassle and less of a fun experience. At the time, the less precise motion controls of games like Just Dance were where it was at; but games like that lived and died with the Wii.
ARMS has much more precise motion controllers, but again, it works because the game doesn't require precise motions to execute anything. Certainly nothing on the level of Skyward Sword's requirements.
I describe myself as a little dose of toxic masculinity.
