| Wyrdness said: We all have opinions sure but if BOTW didn't do a good job at emergent gameplay then that quite frankly means no game has given that the tonnes of videos highlighting the reality to be the opposite to that view. The lock and key structure is what held the series back and I say that as a long time fan since the early days and the irony is that BOTW'S freedom returns the series to what made the very first game fascinating. It was never dungeons and such it was the free sense of adventure and this is what really got lost in the series and why it's mainstream appeal was limited. Nintendo mistook the lock and key structure as what made the series and as a result the series became an expanded dungeon crawler rather than the free adventure it started out as and they started to realise this back with SS. BOTW rightly returned the franchise to what it started out as and put a template in place to maintain that, rather than a lock and key structure that limits and restricts the adventure and gameplay we have the free open adventure that allows the player to tailor the adventure more to their liking than a rigid structure that doesn't budge. |
Sure, we all have opinions, a lot of people obviously like BotW design, I have nothing against that. It’s just that "return to roots" mantra that's been around since it launched is...well, not really true. First Zelda is a gated semi-open world, that heavily relies on "key and lock" mechanism. I only wished that BotW was more like it. Aonuma's 3D Zeldas were a step in the wrong direction, unbalancing the original formula. BotW is, IMO, another step in the wrong direction, unbalancing the formula in the opposite direction. This is why I hope that eventually they will rebalance the formula and actually make it more like original Zelda.
As for emergent gameplay, as I said, I like when games have emergent gameplay. I like it even more when that gameplay is not limited to certain developer approved subsystems and areas, like in BotW.
