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

I think every game has room for improvement. As for these, I agree with some of them. Not so much others.

In terms of the map... I just honestly don't care, because I don't really remember the map that well. I remember the main locales, but it's not like I remembered what's around each corner, so I still felt  the same sense of exploration. It's not like I know where every shrine and cave and lynel is. Maybe that's just the benefit of my pot addled brain. I think the sky and underground areas help make up for the lack of new villages and stuff on the overworld.

I agree with the lack of enemy types. I don't think it's necessarily bad, but more would have been better. Especially if they really required different methods to deal with them. 

Boss fights are hit or miss, but that's just the way it's gonna go. They can't all be winners. I think this is a pretty big improvement over the last game at least. Not as good as Skyward Sword, but that's just a benefit of having a more structured experience.

I disagree on the last point. I think being able to glide from towers is a good addition, particularly because we already did the land traversal in the first game. This time around you have some options to basically "break" the game a little more, which I think is a good thing. 

I think the rewards were also fine. You don't always get something great, but that's kind of the point. Random reward systems actually are better at encouraging people to keep trying things, and while sometimes its a bummer to get an opal, I found something neat often enough to make exploration worthwhile. There are shrines, weapons, schema stones, sage's will, armor, new Zonai devices, and so on.

I think the "problem" with BOTW and TOTK comes with the territory of making it more open and free.

Skyward Sword is kind of the extreme in the other direction for Zelda. Skyward Sword is what I would call contrived. Everything in the game is obviously there just for the purpose of Link's adventure, and feels really inorganic. There's no reason for anything to be there, if not for Link. That makes the world feel less immersive, but it also allows the devs a greater ability to make sure each moment is great and rewarding (in theory anyway). They can make sure any quest leads to some worthwhile rewards, they can make sure each boss is matched well to take advantage of your arsenal, they can make enemies that have to be dealt with in particular ways etc. Skyward Sword had IMO the best dungeons, combat, and puzzles in the experience, at the cost of exploration feeling kind of meh.

BOTW is an organic experience. It feels like the world is, for the most part, something that exists on its own, not just for your benefit. And there's something more fun about that at times, but the devs can't really control all the moment to moment things to make sure they work. They're not going to be able to put something great at every puzzle, ensure every boss is matched to your current abilities, or craft tight puzzles that you can't easily work around by like making a balloon or w/e.

At the end I like both styles of Zelda games, but each is going to have its weak points. Took me a while to get into it, but TOTK has been probably the game that has been most absorbing to me over the last couple of years, so I think it's pretty great even if some things could be better. 

 Oh and Skyward Sword is awesome. Haters gonna hate. Really hope it's not the last of the more linear style Zelda games. Both have their place imo.