I think if BOTW could have fixed its flaws (weak story, mediocre music for Zelda and kind of useless sidequests), it would probably be really close to being my favorite Zelda.I could get over the weaker dungeons and bosses, given that the world is so awesome(the dungeons are good though, just not compared to many other dungeons in the zelda universe), but those three shortcomming put BOTW for me at the third place.

Really? Because Zelda II rather stands out as a RPG more than any other game in the franchise. It is also more restricted than the first one. You have to follow a certain set of dungeons and paths. I think it's closer to Ocarina/WW/TP etc more than it is to BotW.

Agree on dungeon bosses being samey, disagree on aha moments. This is a game where even though a group of people have all beaten it, they all did it in their own ways and have discovered their own secrets. I dont think ive ever played a game with more satisfying exploration.

I enjoyed the game for 170 hours according to the Switch, but you're right the 4 divine beasts were largely forgettable. And I only remember one boss, Thunderblight Ganon as he was a pita due to camera issues.

Exploring the land was great, it didn't feel too much like Zelda though. A lot of shrines felt like padding yet there were also plenty good ones. Atcually I enjoyed exploring the 3 mazes the most, throughout the game I missed underground dungeons and those came closest to that feeling. Hyrule castle was great to explore as well, too bad it was only one and when I came back to it at the end to finish the game it was trivially easy to run to the top.

The game is best when you simply set out in one direction and see what you'll find. Don't unlock the towers, enjoy discovering things at your own pace. I never used fast travel, hence the long play time, and wouldn't want to either. I'll get to the quests whenever I eventually circle back to that town. Instead of having memories of dungeons and great boss fights, I have memories of an epic uninterrupted journey exploring the land and trying to survive almost freezing to death crossing the mountains with only a few pieces of frost resistance food left. Jumped off that mountain on the other side just in time.

And it doesn't strike you a similar case with Breath of the Wild? The game that features several equippable, upgradeable armors with different properties, items that buff your current status or properties, two different ways to upgrade your hero (hearts or stamina) and plenty of weaponry to use, with "legendary" items to be found, adding also massive looting, and coupled with being full of simple sidequests that gives you all kind of rewards?

It's true that Link's Adventure was much much more lineal in that regard. But that game also featured random, unscripted encounters that also happen a lot in Breath of the Wild. I thought the comparison wasn't too far off, aside from the linearity issue.

No. For one single reason: In BotW you don't have to upgrade or anything else to beat the game, in Zelda II you absolutely do. You're basically comparing a true open world game to a linear one.

And besides, nothing really says you have to do the dungeons in BotW, unless you really want to. That also pretty much separates it more from Zelda II.

The "aha!" moments are there. I didn't mean to say the game lacked them - rather, that the game copies some of these for the main dungeons and shared through some shrines, robbing it of the magic of making it happen the very first time.

Until you beat the Yiga's headmaster. Then oh Hylia goddess save my soul with dem katana-wielding ninjas. Those sure were bloodthirsty fuckers claiming for revenge.

Whether the games are linear or open world doesn't take away from a RPG feeling, in my opinion. As far as I've played, Vagrant Story for the PS1 is extremely linear, especially in comparison to other PS1 RPGs, but it's still a RPG by heart. Link's Adventure might be linear and Breath of the Wild might be entirely open, but I did feel a RPG vibe from both. Lesser on the later, but still.

You're forced to upgrade once in BotW, as well as forced to undertake four shrines at the very start of the game, and learn how to use buffs/specific clothing for a certain area. You also have to take a small choice of what path to upgrade at the very start of the game because of the forced upgrade. I know, this is merely limited to the tutorial area of the game and does not strictly represent the rest of the experience, but just wanted to point it out.

The Beasts in BOTW are very much a part of the world you see them moving around and the effect they have on the world and even when exploring them you see the rest of Hyrule from them as opposed to other games where you enter them and it's a completely segregated area, dungeons never felt like part of Hyrule previously. In previous games one of the biggest problems with dungeons was that you get a load of items that have no use outside of the dungeons you find them and some items get replaced by others, essentially a load of clutter, in the end game it was only ever the bombs, bow and hookshot that were important throughout.

ALBW worlds suffered from the same issue as other games being dictated by dungeons you could just do them in any order provided you bought/rented the right item, it was minor freedom at the end of the day the only game that really detracted from things was SS which took a more Metroid like approach and is the foundation from BOTW's template. Aonuma has already said BOTW's template is what Zelda will be built on thankfully, taking a different path doesn't make it a bad Zelda game in fact this case it made it the best one solving a load of problems for the series and its future.

Watching the beasts was cool indeed. It reminded me of Majora's Mask, where you can always see the impending doom above your head, and the townsfolk also references it. But whereas getting to the moon was actually a very weird and unique moment, Divine Beasts felt too same-ish for me at the moment of tackling them. They also didn't allow much room for freedom beneath their dungeon structure, on detriment of Breath of the Wild's philosophy, but also on the series' general way of designing dungeons. The same goes for shrines in this case.

Taking a different path doesn't make Zelda games bad. Pretty much every Zelda iteration has taken a different path, or added a design twist to its foundation. It's just that the strongest elements of Breath of the Wild as a game itself struck me as neglecting the elements of what made other Zelda games great, just like the Resident Evil 4 example I provided to Veknoid. Resident Evil 4 took the franchise in an entirely different path, and for many people it was the best RE game, but I always felt the franchise was never truly the same after it. This doesn't necessarily has to be the case with Breath of the Wild, as it maintains some of the franchise's staples still. I'd love a hybridation of both models and see the result. Maybe it doesn't mesh as good as I would be expecting, but one never knows.