By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
zeldaring said:
Doctor_MG said:

I think what you are failing to factor in is the fact that this ISN'T just BotW on the Switch. The game is able to seamlessly transition between three (actually more like two and a half) huge worlds, not just the single world that is found on BotW. You can go from the sky all the way down to the depths without a single loading screen. They focused on increasing draw distance to help this transition feel more seamless. While they did create a more aggressive dynamic resolution and implement reconstruction techniques, what they've pulled off on the Switch is truly impressive. In addition to this, they've improved some aspects of the game (shadows, textures, albeit not to a significant extent) and they've even SHORTENED the load times. The game is 2.5 times larger than BotW and they managed to reduce load times...isn't that crazy?

When considering graphics it is important to think about the scope of the game. It's quite easy to suggest that linear game A is more graphically impressive than open world game B if you don't. 

I really don't care about the size of the world. None of the fans of the series actually asked for a bigger world. we mainly wanted more dungeons, better performance and  graphics, a Much more refined UI. 

People that thinks like this are not fans of the series. They are fans of the formula that was basically established from OoT an onwards. 

Also you don’t seem to realize that the entire game world of BotW and TotK is the dungeon. Before BotW 3D Zelda was basically designated areas for puzzles and large swats of nothing (except a few enemies to kill). 

Before OoT there really wasn’t the Zelda concept you think is Zelda. LoZ, AoL and aLttP all played very differently with only a loose overarching concept to tie them togheter as ”Zelda” games.