Veknoid_Outcast said:
I really like Skyward Sword but I'm not so sure about this. Skyward Sword is kind of an evolutionary dead end for the series. Breath of the Wild succeeded on critical and commercial fronts in part because it's so different from SS. Again, I enjoy SS and believe strongly that Zelda can succeed with several different blueprints. I just don't see how SS is especially important or influential, apart from steering future Zelda development in the opposite direction. |
BOTW only exists as it is now because of SS both the good and bad from it is what taught Aonuma (who has even says this link below) and the Zelda team what to do with their next approach in the former as SS was the first attempt to deviated from the ALTTP formula for instance the criticism of not being able to explore everything in SS is what lead to a more exploration focus for BOTW leading to an open world game, the criticism of being restricted is what brought up the issue of freedom which was prototyped in ALBW, the survival mechanics are lifted from SS and refined with the crafting, upgrading and gathering of materials from SS, stamina management and the sail cloth also transferred over, along with the ability to micro manage various temporary buffs via potions and accessories, the more in depth NPC interactions in SS is literally what BOTW uses for example a number of side quests in SS would trigger organically because the game tracks your interactions such as who you talk to how often like the storage lady side quest for reference and so on BOTW uses the same system on its NPCs.
SS wasn't an evolutionary dead end it was the beginning I don't think it's any coincidence that BOTW's sequel goes back to the sky here along with the similarities in how it is shown and Nintendo themselves pointing out features SS had that BOTW adopted the sequel is the game they intended SS to be with out the flaws.
