So, you're saying it is a massive success based on what happened at your store?

maybe .. because NA, Eu and japan launch week to the ps4 was different, comparising with the first week launch of ps4 ( only north america ) its very possible but if it adds the first week of all regions I think impossible.

The pro-Horizon rant was the most lulzworthy I've read in a while. You do realize BotW is not at all similar to OoT and TP, right? You realize that it is being praised not for being a typical Zelda, but for breaking the vast majority of Zelda conventions, right? And you do realize that it is in fact Horizon that has the sparser world -- BotW Hyrule is as far from 'empty' as it gets. There is something to find everywhere.

Yes I DO realize all those things but there is no way in hell that Zelda's world is more detailed than Horizon's. You can tell just by watching 5 min videos for both games which has the more indepth world. Horizon is filled with animated leaves, grass and weeds etc and filled with HUGE trees all over. Mostly what I see in Zelda is big mountains and a few trees located in the middle of a vast, empty grassy plain. Nothing against it, I'm just stating what I see. Perhaps more detailed parts of the game have not been shown yet. Goes for both games, though.

I really do want to play this new Zelda because it does look good. I just don't think it's going to be as amazing (for me that is) as Horizon. I mean, I wasn't even expecting Horizon to be any good at all and I wasn't even hyped for it. Was not looking forward to it at all, and yet I bought it day one because of what I've been hearing and seeing. BAM! The game is truly a work of art, both mechanically and artistically. It's a true, well done game through and through. Lots of care went into this that's for certain and it shows.

^This

Ok, just hear me out though. Horizon is freaking amazing and it got an 88. I'm sure Zelda is amazing as well but is it REALLY 98 amazing??? I'm just trying to figure it out here. For example, if BotW did not carry the ZELDA name it would probably land in the 88-92 range. The Zelda name carries a lot of weight especially when handled right, as was obviously the case with the new game.

If this new Zelda is a 98, then Horizon should be at least 92-94. Horizon has a LOT of praise from noteworthy critics but it just has some detractors as well. Zelda, for some reason doesn't attract any negative reviews to lower the score down. Or is it that metacritic just picks and chooses which reviews are submitted to the overall tally? I think this might be it as I have noticed some games get over 100 reviews and others don't even get to 70. Uncharted 4 got over 100 and I'll wait and see if Zelda manages the same. Right now it's at 64 and Horizon has already 94 reviews counted.

Key factor: USgamer gave Horizon a stunning 2.5/5 while they gave Zelda a 5/5. Different reviewers. Horizon's reviewer was a female and seemed to have some agenda.

Anyway, this is definitely a political matter. It always is. The media usually tends to favour one thing or another and they want to promote what they favour. 

I'm just surprised they favoured a gamde like The Last of Us because from what I can tell Horizon is on the same level and maybe even has better gameplay than TLoU which got a 95.

I know, I tend to over analyze when it comes to these things. 

Yeah, you're absolutely right. Funny thing is I recently discussed this exact thing with my brother and he said the same thing as you haha. I just tend to over analyze such things. I know both will be great games but when it comes to these darn reviews, I can't help but think that Zelda would also be a 90 game or so if not for being, well ...ZELDA! Years and years of Zelda's greatness has put it into legendary status, which a game like Horizon cannot compete with. Critics would favour Zelda even if Horizon was, indeed, objectively speaking - the better game. I strongly believe this. Nothing wrong with that, either I guess. Like you said, everyone has opinions and I guess most critics just happen to adore their Zelda.

Meh, I'm going around in circles now. I honestly appreciate both and I'm no Zelda fanboy so I can really state my opinion objectively here. I can play them both and probably enjoy both on an almost equal level. I think I can make a strong point by arguing that what makes one game THAT much better than the other boils down to what universe and concept you prefer. Because let's face it, both Horizon and Zelda are masterfully well made games. But what if someone just doesn't like Horizon's world or themes? perhaps they don't like Aloy for whatever reason? With Zelda, well...everyone just seems to love it so we  can say that Zelda's world and style is just more univerally appealing.

Like, I don't like Star Wars (never watched it growing up as a kid) so I can't see what all the fuss is about. It's just a boring space movie to me but respect the fact that it is universally beloved by its fans. :)

Dude, did you ever play both games? zelda is kinda empty in the first 30 minutes, you know why? cause the great plateau is the tutorial area,once you leave that area and start exploring the game becomes the most deep and immersive game i've ever played, it's amazing how alive the world feels and horizon is nowhere close to it, i finished both and horizon is more like an interactive movie, it has a slow start and it takes forever til you are able to start the game, the tutorial part in the beginning when aloy is a kid is boring and it reminds the new god of war trailer, while zelda botw is more focused on the gameplay and details, horizon is more focused on delivering graphics and a hollywood story.

 That's why horizon scored less than zelda, uncharted 4, last of us. It's because it doesn't bring anything new from what the other franchises brought, the reviews of zelda isn't based on nostalgia, most of the outlets scored less than 88 in the previous zelda franchise, if the game is getting praised by EVERYONE, it's because something right the game did. It's getting embarassing to watch all these people that didn't even finished both games come here and embarass themselves saying it's based on nostalgia, i didn't see any of these on the uncharted 4 claiming it only got 92 cause of nostalgia from the other 3 games, this nostalgia argument is embarassing.

I get that you love Horizon, and I'm glad you enjoy it so much. But just because a collection of reviewers prefer another game to it doesn't mean there's a conspiracy or an "agenda" or a generation of people blinded by nostalgia.

At some point we need to let go of all this petty console wars stuff. We complain about the legitimacy of the critical process and then bitch and moan when game A scores better than game B, and invent imaginary narratives about backroom dealings and phony reviews. Don't you see that we're part of the problem? Video game review sites have to weather the storm of angry fan bases crying foul when some hyped game get's a 7 or 8 out of 10. Yes, there's unfair pressure from above by publishers and advertisers, but there's also unruly and unreasonable expectations from below from fans.

If you really care about the integrity of the review process, point out the flaws in every review, not just the ones that personally tick you off. Partisanship will only perpetuate this vicious circle.

Detail does not mean complexity. A game world can be full of details, but 'empty' gameplay-wise. If all you can do at the nice textures, and grass is stare at them, rather than engage with content provided to you by the game, then that is not 'complexity'. Yes, in terms of graphics Horizon is a league or two above TBotW -- and yes, in terms of pure visuals Horizon is more 'lush', and has more 'detail' in its environments.

But this is a purely visual perspective -- i.e. how each game 'looks'. In an open-world game, when you refer to an 'empty' world you refer to a world that, despite how large or visually detailed, offers little for the gamer to interact with gameplay-wise. For example, Twilight Princess is one of the worst offenders of this kind. A relatively large (even if sand-boxed) world which was offensively bland and 'empty', with very little for the player to do. Ocarina of Time had a more organic world, but that was constrained by hardware limitations as well as gameplay conventions of the 90s, so it is hardly a fair comparison.

I have played both games. Horizon is a visual treat, but in terms of gameplay does very little differently. In terms of content in its open world, it is clearly coming second to TBotW -- the new Hyrule is as far from 'empty' as it has been for any game of this kind. The last time I was so amazed by the plethora of gameplay options and places to explore was with Oblivion -- and in many ways the new Zelda tops every single open world game I have tried.

If only its graphics didn't look so dated...