Rookie mistake. And bias.

This article is surprisingly badly written when you consider it's not even that hard to criticize Breath of the Wild. A lot of what he says is just stupid or wrong.

"If Breath of the Wild is your personal favorite game or favorite Zelda game, I'm not speaking to you. It's the people foaming at the mouth at how it's objectively better than other games"

Even though I've heard people use objectively in the gaming community, I don't see "objectivity" referred to as much as it is in music or film communities. This is most likely because the open-ended nature of video games, which we all experience somewhat similarly but somewhat differently, allows us to form our own opinions. Games require that the player input certain functions and variables to complete the game, and since it takes a relationship with the product to complete a game it's arguably the most subjective art form there is. I don't see a lot of people saying Breath of the Wild is objectively the best game ever, or that it's the best Zelda game objectively, I just see a lot of people posting opinions without saying "in my opinion". Which, you shouldn't have to say because if you're posting it, it's obviously your opinion? If your entire metric for Breath of the Wild is that it's overrated because critics have called it one of the best games ever, then this is true for literally every video game that's gotten scores similar to Breath of the Wild, because there is no objective merit, just opinions. ESPECIALLY the Zelda community understands subjectivity, ranking lists from Zelda fans encompass every part of the rainbow.

"The core concept of "everything happened a long time ago this is just ruins" is a cliche that is rarely interesting (exceptions are Fallout and BioShock)."

Ironic.

"There is no developing plot within the areas you visit"

Technically not true but ok.

"Even beginners are able to dispatch Guardians in the Major Tests of Strength, while sponges are the worst way to create difficulty and "progression.""

This reads terribly, probably wrote it backwards.

"While four orbs are virtually the same as four heart pieces "

Lol can you imagine if this was true?

" That includes rendering horses completely useless and further discouraging you from opening a menu, carefully selecting which shield you want to break, and surfing rather than just jumping and pressing A. This actually weakens the sense of exploration. You never have to find ways to access something; it's either jump and glide or climb. "

Can't say I agree and I feel like this is really not representative of the surfing. You surf in areas where the terrain is curved down or flat and gliding isn't the best option. You mainly surf in areas with sand or snow. There were mainly times in the game where I felt surfing was the option to go with and not gliding. You have to be on a high area to glide, you don't with surfing.

I can't believe he brought up "brevity is the soul of wit" when the article is badly written and full of snarky comments, and "haha" references that just waist time.

I can't argue with a lot of his logic, he is spot on and it's why I put 85+ hours in the game and am currently struggling to turn on my Switch and finish it. I don't want to go to Death Mountain and finish the game, I'm bored of it. He definitely had a lot of good points. I would say "where were these critics when Skyrim/Fallout 3/Oblivion came out?" but it seems like even major websites are starting to change and become more critical. Plus individual writers have different philosophies and his rant on the Open world concept being too easy to conflate with inherently good was a great part of the article. It's just too bad that games like Breath of the Wild and Fallout 4 have to be the ones kicked in the butt, when Fallout 3 and Skyrim and many other open world games led up to this point. Maybe people were just really oblivious in the 7th gen.

The biggest problem I had with this article though is that he needlessly comments on objectivity and subjectivity while stating opinions over and over again that are subjective. He tried to make this into an objective "Breath of the Wild isn't THAT GOOD" article but even with all these critiques he's ignoring that A) some of these are still opinions and B ) the personal journey someone takes is more important than what you write on a computer screen. Being "objective" is a trap a writer should never fall under in the first place.

Hm... how about this one from last year about The Legend of Zelda: A Link to the Past, titled "Is it still acceptable to consider AlttP an all-time great?"

Everyone of you should have heard of The Legend of Zelda, and most of you should know about the SNES installment A Link to the Past. It was certainly a great game during its era, but times change and so should our perception of classic video games. Is it still acceptable to consider ALttP an all-time great? I don't think so, and I'll explain why.

The game's introduction is about how the seven sages did their job in the past (I won't go into detail here) which is then followed up by a cut to the present where the sorcerer Aghanim corrupted the King of Hyrule's mind and captured the descendants of the seven sages to break the seal that was put into place in the past. All of the descendants happen to be females, no exceptions. This fact reveals that the developers saw females as the only appropriate sex to fill the victim role, because it is too much of a coincidence for all of the descendants to be female. Meanwhile, the hero of the game is of course male.

The first task in the game is to save the last remaining descendant who happens to be Princess Zelda. She's locked up in the basement of Hyrule Castle. Once you've made your way down there, she doesn't seem to be particularly grateful and instead urges you to hurry up and get to the throne room. Once there, she is quite blunt in telling the hero, "Push the throne. Come on, do it already!" At this early point in the game it's already clear that females do not get portrayed in a sensible manner. They are either helpless victims or nagging bitches.

It doesn't get better once Princess Zelda has been brought to a safe place. The next task is to pay Kakariko village a visit. There you encounter hysterical women who don't ask questions and instead immediately call for the guards before they run off to hide in their houses. Well, of course, it's seemingly not possible for females to behave in any reasonable manner. The picture that the developers paint of women couldn't be further from the truth.

Once the player has obtained the Master Sword and is tasked with saving the helpless maidens from the various dungeons in the world, it's time to abandon all hopes that the female characters in this game would ever see respectful treatment. Every time you save one of the descendants of the seven sages, the hero will be told how awesome he is, how much faith the girls have in him and how much they are looking forward to do absolutely nothing while the hero will go on to do all the work to save the world.

The sexism in The Legend of Zelda: A Link to the Past is so rampant and blatant that we as gamers cannot continue to hold this game in high regard. Not only should we be better than this, we need to be better than this. Our medium won't be respected as an art form as long as we keep clinging to the conventions of the past. Conventions which have long been outdated. We must move forward together. If you like A Link to the Past, chances are good that you are a sexist. Don't be like that. Be better than that.

Different authors.

Wait, the two articles aren't from the same person. When I asked "how about this one," I merely wanted to know what you think about the ALttP piece.

Sorry about the confusion.