That and a few more towns.

Reminds me of Assassin's Creed Origins. It's a good game but it's not an AC game anymore because they completely removed stealth.

Much like BOTW isn't a Zelda game anymore because they completely removed the good game design.

they didnt. play the original nes zelda and u will realised that they simply return to the roots of the series - explorations

we have had enough "OOT style Zelda", its time for them to break the barrier and create something new

BOTW blown my mind away. it is everything I want in a Zelda game, i wish they can make a better story & stronger enemy in the next title (or limit the food consumption in a certain amount of time)

The shrines seem like scattered ideas thought up by ever member of the team, all thrown into their own idea.  It was probably easier to have 120 separate ideas, than to have 120 ideas separated cohesively into 10 or so traditional dungeons.

I think fans have spoken up about this and the team will listen.  My hope is to see a balance between the freedom of BotW style and the themeing of the more traditional stuff(less of the "get item - use it" stuff and more of the unique vistas for the dungeons themselves).

I understand how it could be easier, but I think the ideas could still be incorporated into 8 or so dungeons, as long as they have the right planners on the job. But it is what it is, just a nitpick at this point.

I hope they take the feedback as well. I don't want them to return to the get item, and use it on this dungeon either and I don't think they'll go back to that for the mainline. But yeah, more impressive and themed dungeons with multiple ways to traverse based off of your repertoire of items would be great.

I think the problems with Zelda began after Majora’s Mask. IMO, Breath of the Wild is the first great Zelda experience since the N64. Judging the game as “not a great Zelda” because it is NOT another derivative of Ocarina of Time seems a little bit silly. OoT was great in 1998, but Nintendo hasn’t been able to improve on it; it’s 20 years later. Breath of the Wild finally got the franchise out of its 16 year slump, and put it back on top.

Open world is where Zelda belongs for the foreseeable future. Another locked down linear dungeon focused derivative of Ocarina of Time would be backwards. 

Having played literally every canon Zelda game over the course of a year (many for the second or third time) leading up to BotW, I can safely say I never felt like I was not playing a Zelda game.

BotW was different in many ways, but it still had all of the core elements that made it a Zelda game. Many, many puzzles (despite feeling toward the lack of traditional dungeons), exploration, central plot elements, charm, etc. Even acter playing all of the old ones, I still felt this way. With that in mind, I see BotW as a fantastic Zelda game.

If you only played Zelda games to be a dungeon crawler, I van understand how you feel. However as a 30 year Zelda vet (was born the same year Zelda came to the west and started at a very young age), I can tell you that what people consider a Zelda game is subjective.

Some like the exploration and puzzles (BotW had much of this), some play for deeper understandings of the over arching plot (while the plot of BotW was very simple, the lore and history within the game was very deep), and some play for the dungeon crawling experience (this is where BotW fell short).

I am going to assume our OP falls in the later, as if I remember correctly he does not care about the overarching story or timeline, so we can rule that aspect out. Is he wrong? No, absolutely not...is he right though?

Again, not even close. What makes a Zelda game is in the eye of the beholder. While what he may like about past games could be lacking for him, for others (like myself) it had everything it needed to be a true and great Zelda experience. After all, every game plays different in one way or another.

Zelda 1 and BotW were true open world

Zelda 2 was more like a platformer

ALttP, OoT, TP, Minish Cap, Oracle games, and Link's Awakening fall under what most people consider the traditional formula.

Four Swords, Four Swords Adventures, and Triforce Heros all fall under co op experiences.

Wind Waker, Phantom Hourglass, and Spirit Tracks were all games that featured completely new ways to explore the land through boats and trains, and two of then used touch controls.

Skyward Sword featured the concept of having environmental dungeons lead up to the actual dungeons. Many times it fely like you were in a dungeon when you were not.

Majora's Mask had the 3 day system and was Side Quest orientated rather than dungeon orientated, having only four dungeons.

And a Link Between Worlds was a combo of open world and traditional Zelda formulas.

So as you can see, most canon Zelda titles olay different from one another as it is. So what you might perceive as a Zelda game may differ completely from another person's point of view. There is no right or wrong answer in this case, there are points to be made on both sides.

You feel one way, I feel another. That is all there is to it and I understand where you are coming from. Just be aware that not everyone shares the same view on what makes a good or bad Zelda game, as there are just too many factors that go with that.

Just my two rupees.

This was such an interesting reply. I wouldn't say I don't care for the overarching plot; I said on the OP that I just couldn't find an attachment to BoTW's because of the way it's told, partially because of it's open-ended structure (which made for some mundane and repetitive dialogue of things you already know, and the discovery of other key points less impactful, plus character development feeling kind of off such as the frog sequence of Zelda I alluded to).

As for how games play with each other, plenty of people have alluded to Zelda 1 a lot in this thread, which regrettably I haven't played and based on what people have said it kinda defies the premise of my thread entirely. All I can point out is that I agree about Zelda games playing differently in each entry, every game with its own personality and its own sense of adventure, but they're mostly encouraged toward dungeon exploring (from my perspective).

Zelda 2, even if it plays as a platformer, featured heavy exploration of dungeons. You already mentioned those that can be considered traditional formula; I felt like the dungeon aspect of Wind Waker is integrated too much in the core to seem secondary to the ocean exploration, even if that's what the player will be doing most of the time (unsure if that makes sense). It's a similar case with Phantom Hourglass, who features plenty of exploration but it always takes us back to the central and core dungeon to clear more rooms. You bring an interesting point with Majora's Mask (especially considering this is my favourite Zelda game); however, even if there were only four major dungeons, it still had things like the Pirate fortress or Ikana's Castle, or maze-like scenarios such as the Deku palace, and these places weren't optional.

Haven't really played Skyward Sword or Spirit Tracks, so I can't say with these.

All in all I can't really disagree with the notion that beauty is in the eye of the beholder, so I guess I should have worded the OP a bit better?