| HoloDust said: 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. |
First Zelda is far more open then the games that followed, in a number of the following games you have to finish the dungeons even where as the first the lock only applies until you get the item in the dungeon after that you can move on. This allowed a more free adventure than many of the following games for example in OOT it didn't matter if you got the item or not some dungeons had to be done before others unlocked, the games eventually where dungeon crawlers with a semi open world hub that you were restricted from exploring anyway they may as well have been linear with no hub as they all hinged on the dungeons resulting in it feeling less and less like an adventure like the original. BOTW isn't an unbalancing it's a rebalancing as now Hyrule is worth exploring again returning the feel of a free open adventure.
The last part of your doesn't make a lot of sense tbh because the are loads of videos highlighting the emergent gameplay having utility and a lot of it across the whole game and not just certain areas like you claim, the is a whole subculture with in the game dedicated to this.
