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

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Map towers in games..... They are all Ubisoft games

To those who say that a new IP gets treated harsher:

What about Resident Evil 6, for example? Old IP, critics still gave it a low score. Hmm.

What about Silent Hill 5, Mario Tennis Ultra Smash, Starfox Zero, etc. Maybe it's because these games have flaws? And with that in mind, maybe HZD isn't just as good.

It's STILL a great score, there is no matter to debate that. And everbody should play and enjoy it. But towers are definitley not the reason why Zelda got a higher score.



Around the Network

I'm not familiar with how Horizon implements towers, but based on what I've read, it seems the output of both isn't quite the same. Towers in Zelda are essentially just better vantage points that color your map, and feel much more like a nod to the man-fish in Windwaker than anything else. I have no idea how reviewers looked at both games, but if the implementation is different, that might explain why certain reviewers (assuming they're the same reviewer looking at both) weighed the two games differently.

Now, if reviewers are docking points for something trivial, like the fact that a tower is a tower, than that simply means the reviewers are morons.



NNID: Zephyr25 / PSN: Zephyr--25 / Switch: SW-4450-3680-7334

GoOnKid said:

To those who say that a new IP gets treated harsher:

What about Resident Evil 6, for example? Old IP, critics still gave it a low score. Hmm.

What about Silent Hill 5, Mario Tennis Ultra Smash, Starfox Zero, etc. Maybe it's because these games have flaws? And with that in mind, maybe HZD isn't just as good.

It's STILL a great score, there is no matter to debate that. And everbody should play and enjoy it. But towers are definitley not the reason why Zelda got a higher score.

Well, past Zeldas have also received lower scores.  What it comes down to is this Zelda is better than past Zeldas so it gets rated on that.  How many reviewers compared BoTW to Horizon or Witcher 3 or GTA V?  Not many at all... they're not really rating it on scale with other open world games.  They're tating on how well the open world formula was applied to the Zelda universe.



My 8th gen collection

OP, can you link to these reviewers who supposedly docked points from Horizon solely for map towers? Maybe the rest of BotW is so damn good it overcomes map tower points :)



Super_Boom said:
I'm not familiar with how Horizon implements towers, but based on what I've read, it seems the output of both isn't quite the same. Towers in Zelda are essentially just better vantage points that color your map, and feel much more like a nod to the man-fish in Windwaker than anything else. I have no idea how reviewers looked at both games, but if the implementation is different, that might explain why certain reviewers (assuming they're the same reviewer looking at both) weighed the two games differently.

Now, if reviewers are docking points for something trivial, like the fact that a tower is a tower, than that simply means the reviewers are morons.

From Destructoid's review conclusion:

"Horizon Zero Dawn is a fascinating premise wrapped in a tortilla of tropes. It has detective vision, radio towers, skill trees, masked load screens (Tony Hawk's American Wasteland gets no credit for popularizing this in 2005, by the way), and a world map littered with billions of points of interest -- all stuff you've seen before."

They gave it a 7.5 and seemed very down on Horizon having elements that featured in other games.  He also implied that he found crafting to be tedious.

I mean, how are skill trees a negative?  How are points of interest a negative?  Masked load screens?  I don't care if I've seen these things before, I care if they're well implemented or not.  

Just for the sake of comparison, the same writer gave Super Bomberman R a 7 and Zelda a 10.  He also seemed to like crafting and towers in Zelda.



Around the Network
Intrinsic said:

Ok, pending release a lot of gamers and even reviewers looked at horizon and slanted it for how similar it is to a "ubisoft game" because of its use of map towers. You know, those things that when you climb to its top reveals a small portion of the map.

There were reviewers that even docked points from the game citing that because it had these "map towers" that they hated it felt too much like farcry or assasins creed.

Can someone explain to me how its possible that no one has said anything about the "map towers" in Breath of the Wild?

it took me stumbling across this article from videogamer  to even know they were the game proper as most reviews I have watched didn't even mention them.

The fundamental difference is that in BOTW, the map towers only tell you the topography of the area, whereas in a Ubisoft-esque game, it fills the map with a bunch of icons and chores to do.



Delicious, delicious games.

Super_Boom said:
I'm not familiar with how Horizon implements towers, but based on what I've read, it seems the output of both isn't quite the same. Towers in Zelda are essentially just better vantage points that color your map, and feel much more like a nod to the man-fish in Windwaker than anything else. I have no idea how reviewers looked at both games, but if the implementation is different, that might explain why certain reviewers (assuming they're the same reviewer looking at both) weighed the two games differently.

Now, if reviewers are docking points for something trivial, like the fact that a tower is a tower, than that simply means the reviewers are morons.

Essentially, this. The towers are the spiritual successor of the map-filling feature from WW. The problem with Ubisort towers is that they always feel like busy work, mostly because there are so many and there isn't much benefit to doing them. Towers don't here. In BotW, they are a tool for encouraging exploration by triggering the need for completion.

That being said, there's nothing wrong with Horizon's, either. At all. And this is coming from someone who was nervous about them at first. Neither feel like busy work.



Well, one of those two games definitely has more of an ubisoft look and feel, but I'm not too sure why that particular feature is a negative. I actually rather enjoyed the challenge of climbing some of those in games like AC and Farcry.

I do have a theory: The knowledge that you're about to glide off high places in Zelda and potentially swap to some shieldboarding awesomeness may have made Zelda's towers seem quite cool.

Besides, Zelda's towers are more for looking for things via binoculars on your own and tagging them on the map; they don't really function like one you'd find in the aforementioned AC or Farcry were suddenly everything is revealed.



pokoko said:

From Destructoid's review conclusion:

"Horizon Zero Dawn is a fascinating premise wrapped in a tortilla of tropes. It has detective vision, radio towers, skill trees, masked load screens (Tony Hawk's American Wasteland gets no credit for popularizing this in 2005, by the way), and a world map littered with billions of points of interest -- all stuff you've seen before."

They gave it a 7.5 and seemed very down on Horizon having elements that featured in other games.  He also implied that he found crafting to be tedious.

I mean, how are skill trees a negative?  How are points of interest a negative?  Masked load screens?  I don't care if I've seen these things before, I care if they're well implemented or not.  

Just for the sake of comparison, the same writer gave Super Bomberman R a 7 and Zelda a 10.  He also seemed to like crafting and towers in Zelda.

That last part, I couldn't help but wonder, does he have to give Zleda the exact same scopre and give out the exact same gripes and words that he gave Hoizon?.



Step right up come on in, feel the buzz in your veins, I'm like an chemical electrical right into your brain and I'm the one who killed the Radio, soon you'll all see

So pay up motherfuckers you belong to "V"

Lots of tinfoil hats in this thread...



If it isn't turnbased it isn't worth playing   (mostly)

And shepherds we shall be,

For Thee, my Lord, for Thee. Power hath descended forth from Thy hand, That our feet may swiftly carry out Thy command. So we shall flow a river forth to Thee And teeming with souls shall it ever be. In Nomine Patris, et Filii, et Spiritūs Sancti. -----The Boondock Saints