This game really lacks a sense of progression...

he's a falseflagger and an attention whore, report and ignore. he's sad enough to celebrate the slightest hint of attention, ignore him

Progression is not necessarily "The game presents obstacles and rewards me for overcoming them," although this game does do that. Because exploring is the game, you dictate your expectations and your experience of progression based on the way you make your way through it.

I already said the exploration is great, but that alone doesn't dull the sense of disappointment I feel
>because exploring is the game
and discovering a variation of creatures somehow isn't exploring? death mountain having almost the exact same enemies as the snowy mountains doesn't make me feel like I explored and discovered shit in that department

So your main problem is the lack of enemy variety?

that and weapon moveset variety. I think it's a good game and I'm enjoying it

This user gets it.

BotW gives the player a single goal: save the princess from the evil castle. The entire game about the player figuring out how to do that in their own way. The sense of reward and progression is a personal experience different to each player. Its what makes the game so great and so baffling to plebs who can't wrap their heads around the concept.

BotW ain't perfect. But you'll rarely see a genuine complaint which ranks above 'nitpicking'.

Attached: 1557048321135.jpg (764x764, 134K)

I guess, but the same could be said of any game. It's a fundamental fact that isn't necessarily positive or negative the way you put it.

As soon as you no longer feel like you're progressing, you're free to face Ganon. Different people will reach that point at different times, but that's the entire reason why the game is as open-ended as it is.

>I agree, the fact that the game gets exponentially easier as you explore and upgrade is one of the bigger flaws.

That's literally what progression is you retards. It's not progression if you don't feel like you're getting stronger.

Progression how? You get massively OP and outscale enemies very hard.

I think it’s just how the game was designed. Exploration and side activities directly power you up, so an unskilled player can stil beat the game by persistence. The game’s biggest flaw then is just that the end game stuff is too easy. And Master Mode sucks.

Both of those are completely fair. If you're getting tired of using weapons, shake things up: run down enemies with spears on horses or freeze them and blow them off cliffs. Maybe give them a metal weapon and shoot or hit them with shock weapons. You could even build a fire, use the updraft to launch into the air, and rain bomb arrows down on them. Hell, you could even use a mask to sneak by them entirely and steal everything in their camps or use stealth and take them out quietly one by one.

>progression is getting strong
wow, you are very dumb

I wasn't complaining about Link getting stronger. I was complaining at Link getting stronger at a much faster rate than everything else in the game.
The hardest enemies in the game are trivial by the time you've finished the second divine beast. It's poor balancing, especially when compared to other action games.

>The entire game about the player figuring out how to do that in their own way. The sense of reward and progression is a personal experience different to each player. Its what makes the game so great and so baffling to plebs who can't wrap their heads around the concept.
The design philosophy itself is flawed because the sacrifice for that open-endedness is recycled content and a weak atmosphere.

>It's not progression if you don't feel like you're getting stronger.
dumbest fucking shit I've read today. are you seriously saying games that gradually get more difficult don't have a sense of progression?

Games fun of you're the kind of autist who will spend hours expirementing with the physics engine trying to discover unique interactions in the games internal mechanics. If that's not your thing then its just an average game with little sense of progression, tedious climbing worsened by weather, breakable weapons, passable melee combat, awful soundtrack, reussed assets and mediocre dungeons.

By the way, while we're talking about this game, I felt like the desert area/arc was the best part of the game. It felt very dense despite the environment.

Progression is more a measure of your character stats and inventory in this case. Turning Link into an absolute monster with three stamina bars, 28 hearts (JUST LET ME HAVE 30 WITH STAMINA), all armor fully maxed out, etc. made me feel like I really was the ubermensch they depicted in that one cutscene in the past, especially comparing to how little you start with.

I think it's because the town was absolutely alive. Series-wise, it's second only to Clock Town in how much there is to do and see.

>the sacrifice for that open-endedness is recycled content and a weak atmosphere.

First of all, what is this 'recycled content'? And I dunno about atmosphere, I thought the game had plenty.

>First of all, what is this 'recycled content'?
not him, but content that has long outstayed it's welcome and is used again instead of introducing something new. like bokoblins and moblins being EVERYWHERE

Completely agreed. The game lacks a progression in content and mechanics. After a dozen hours or so, you pretty much have experienced everything the game has to offer. I can only think of a couple exceptions like Eventide. And the sheer size of the world means you can spend 100+ hours going through it all, which leads to a ton of repetition.

And it's not like they would have to totally overhaul the game to make the progression work. They just need to scale the difficulty/complexity of the content to some degree, focus more on handcrafted content rather than copypaste, and add more runes on top of your starting kit that can be discovered throughout the world. A sequel could easily do that.

>like bokoblins and moblins being EVERYWHERE

Yeah thats true. Moblins and Bokoblins are everywhere. But that's like complaining about Koopa Troopers in a Mario game. Every video game ever made does this. Also, in BotW there are many variations in how they are presented - either in difficultly (visually notable by their colour), by the type of weapons they hold (melee or ranged bows), whether they're on horseback and so forth. And the strategy for engaging them varies accordingly.

If the only complaint is "asset reuse" then thats a nitpick. Every game does this.

Enemies, shrines, parts in and out of shrines made for runes, shrine rewards, weapons, Korok seeds, flying platforms in Master mode, Skull hideouts, and probably other stuff I'm still forgetting.
You've seen practically everything once you've played for 15 hours or so.

>Every video game ever made does this.
lmao what the fuck, that's just not true at all
>it's okay because mario did it
fuck mario, we're not talking about that
>recolored
>variation
come the fuck on
>serious lack of enemy variety in an action RPG is a nitpick
how much do you get paid? seriously, what the fuck is wrong with you? I even like the game, it's just a simple complaint

the issue was the lack of variety between biomes, most of the time it was a standard enemy or miniboss you had seen before but with some kind of elemental ability attached to them. The desert had the sandworms which were unique but it need more enemies like that spread across the entire area

Also, why make a nature-themed Zelda but not add Skulltulas, Deku Babas, Tektites, etc? Or if you really needed every enemy to be humanoid to drop weapons then what about Armos, Darknuts or even Poes given how many Hylians died due to the calamity

>You've seen practically everything once you've played for 15 hours or so.

Most Zelda games barely last that long. Whats your point?

Listen, I not defending BotW. Its just that most of the time, the 'complaints' raised against BotW are either stupid redundant nonsense or they're the kind of shit which happens in every video game ever made.

You want a genuine FLAW? Here's one; by giving the player all the tools at the beginning of the game, the shrines can never escalate in difficulty. Thats a REAL fault. But it doesn't stop the game being good.

Asset reuse is hardly a crime. I'm playing Spider-Man on PS4 and every fucking goon in the city is exactly the same. There's even less variety than BotW.

>I not defending BotW
lol yes you are
>redundant nonsense or they're the kind of shit which happens in every video game ever made
how fucking few video games have you played where the lack of enemy variety in BotW is the norm? earlier zelda games had WAY more types of enemies, so stop fucking lying
look at this image and see the ridiculous amount of reused enemies and how few are actually unique

Attached: botw.jpg (1920x1080, 135K)

>earlier zelda games had WAY more types of enemies

Early Zelda games cannot touch BotW in terms of enemy AI, behavioural routines and animation. Its an absolute GULF.

Please find a better argument. Because this is pathetic.

>Most Zelda games barely last that long.
Yes, including all forms of content within those games. Even TP and SS which last 50 hours to completion did not get as monotonous.
About the atmosphere, the lack of unique content really hurts it and the low quality combat doesn't allow for tense fights later on with its skill curve.

I liked Zora's Domain. Had a really nice atmosphere with all of the long-lived Zora knowing Link from a hundred years ago.

>moving the goalpost
holy shit dude. it has too few enemies, and they're reused too much, that's the end of it

This game would have been much better if the costumes that were locked behind amiibos were found through completing shrines or other tasks.

also, the AI is extremely mediocre. what the fuck are you talking about?

>Early Zelda games cannot touch BotW in terms of enemy AI, behavioural routines and animation.
>What is Zelda 2

>holy shit dude. it has too few enemies, and they're reused too much, that's the end of it

Holy shit dude, BotW is a masterpiece of game design and one of the best open world games ever made but by all means keep nitpicking the game and maybe it will suddenly stop.

>it will stop
what will stop? what the fuck are you talking about?
>nitpicking
enemy variety in an action RPG game is not a nitpick
>masterpiece in game design
nah, it's a good game, but heavily flawed

>GULF
?

I don't know why my post got deleted
>you constantly stumble upon weapon upgrades
>you do shrines for more power and storage
>you come across stronger and situational armor
>you constantly find new ingredients and recipes
>not to mention the emergent physics gameplay

It has the most intricate progression system of a Zelda game and its riffing off of common progression systems is one of the best things about it.

That fails to take into account how much more complex botws combat system is compared to earlier entries.

Attached: 02f.jpg (655x527, 59K)

Enemy's in BotW:

Bokoblins
Moblins
Guardian Scouts
Guardian Drones
Guardian Towers
Shrine Guardians
Shrine Guardian bosses
Talus (various types ice/fire etc)
Hinox
Stallnox
Moldulga
Yiga Assassin
Yiga Warrior
Wizrobe (various types ice/fire/electric & swarms etc)
Malice spawn
Keese (various types ice/fire/electic etc)
Talus sprogs
Lizalfos (various types ice/fire/electic etc)
Stalfos (various types)
Wolves
Boars
Bears
Weird ostrich things
Lynels
Octoroks (water/land/volcanic types)
ChuChus (various types ice/fire/electric etc)

This doesn't even include the vast amount of non-hostile wildlife to hunt/kill/capture/interact with. Nor does acknowledge the gulf in enemy animation, AI and behavioural routines compared to every other Zelda.

>nah, it's a good game, but heavily flawed

Nah its an amazing game and even after more than two years I've never seen a single convincing argument prove otherwise. Thats why the game is still topping GOAT lists long after the hype has died down. You have nothing but nitpicks bub. Just accept the game deserved its praise and move on with your life.

>start game
>endgame enemies kick your ass immediately and you have almost no chance or killing them
>midgame
>endgame enemies are tough as hell to kill but if you are good you can kill them with great effort or cunning
>end of game
>endgame enemies are now a decent challenge but if you know what youre doing they arent a problem
>postgame
>you are no overpowered and can stomp and enemy for fun

>enemy variety in an action RPG game is not a nitpick

I guess this Spider-Man game I'm playing is total shit then.

Also, here's a secret, you don't have to fight a fucking thing in BotW, so stop crying about nothing

>you constantly stumble upon weapon upgrades
which are the exact same weapons as you got at the very start but this time with better stats
>you do shrines for more power and storage
again, just stats
>you come across stronger and situational armor
I agree with that one
>you constantly find new ingredients and recipes
that too
>not to mention the emergent physics gameplay
I don't see what this has to do with progression
>complex botws combat system is compared to earlier entries
it's fun and satisfying, but complex? sure, in comparison to earlier zelda games, but it's just average in terms of modern ARPGs
is that list supposed to be impressive? are you serious?
>Just accept the game deserved its praise and move on with your life.
I really don't care about reviews and shit like that, I'm talking from my perspective. you talk as if you have facts on your side
>you don't have to fight a fucking thing in BotW, so stop crying about nothing
you are beyond retarded. I WANT to fight enemies in botw, but it gets boring because a lack of variety

>stats don't count as progression.

At this point you're just complaining the game doesn't block off areas until you get the particular item from a particular dungeon, which is still there with the beast powers lol

Enemies in OoT:
Amy
Anubis
Armos
Baby Dodongo
Bari
Beamos
Beth
Big Deku Baba
Big Poe
Big Skulltula
Biri
Blue Bubble
Blue Tektite
Business Scrub
Club Moblin
Cucco
Deku Baba
Deku Scrub
Dinolfos
Dodongo
Fire Keese
Flat
Floormaster
Freezard
Gerudo Guard
Gerudo Thief
Gibdo
Gohma Larva
Gold Skulltula
Green Bubble
Guay
Ice Keese
Iron Knuckle
Joelle
Keese
Leever
Like Like
Lizalfos
Mad Scrub
Moblin
Octorok
Parasitic Tentacle
Peahat
Peahat Larva
Poe
Red Bubble
Red Tektite
ReDead
Shabom
Shell Blade
Skull Kid
Skulltula
Skullwalltula
Spike
Stalchild
Stalfos
Stinger
Tailpasaran
Torch Slug
Wallmaster
White Bubble
White Wolfos
Withered Deku Baba
Wolfos
This is pretty weak bait.

I really don't care. I'll say it again; you can't come with a single convincing argument which amounts to anything more than nitpicking.

>you don't have to fight a fucking thing in BotW
you also don't have to play it either but that doesn't excuse there being a lack of variety when it comes to enemy types. It's a false statement anyway since to make the most of the game you do have to engage in combat for a large chunk of the game and it's not like you can beat the game without skipping bosses/Ganon

Attached: darknut_by_deimos_remus-da7yh0n.jpg (1156x1539, 1.42M)

>sure, in comparison to earlier zelda game
Which is what we are doing, keep up. If you want dark Souls just play that

>you talk as if you have facts on your side
Just stop

And again; This doesn't even include the vast amount of non-hostile wildlife to hunt/kill/capture/interact with. Nor does acknowledge the gulf in enemy animation, AI and behavioural routines compared to every other Zelda.

no, that's not what I'm doing. if merely having better stats while doing the exact same thing feels like progression to you, have fun
>I really don't care
yeah, you do.
>you can't come with a single convincing argument which amounts to anything more than nitpicking
I disagree, and I think the exact same thing of you
>Which is what we are doing
no, that's what YOU are doing. BotW's quality should be held to a general standard, not just zelda
>Just stop
no. get out of the thread if you don't feel like arguing

>that doesn't excuse there being a lack of variety when it comes to enemy types.

Once again, you can argue this redundant point against every fucking video game ever made.

>if merely having better stats while doing the exact same thing feels like progression to you, have fun
Good thing there's more to the progression to the game than just that to :)
It's been 2 years bud people aren't even talking about it now. The game was good why are you still butthurt lmao?

>no, that's what YOU are doing.
We were literally comparing enemy variety between games you goalpost moving autist.

>This doesn't even include the vast amount of non-hostile wildlife to hunt/kill/capture/interact with.
They aren't enemies so they're irrelevant, it's a moot point.
>Nor does acknowledge the gulf in enemy animation, AI and behavioural routines compared to every other 3D Zelda.
*ftfy

>Everywhere is open practically from the start so there's no way for it to have progression.
kek. Climbing taller mountains, swimming up water falls

>They aren't enemies so they're irrelevant,
lol wrong

>It's been 2 years bud people aren't even talking about it now. The game was good why are you still butthurt lmao?
have you even read my posts? do you have dementia? I already said I LIKE THE GAME. I'm playing it for the first time, I didn't have an interest in it until recently
>We were literally comparing enemy variety between games you goalpost moving autist.
no, that's what some user used as his arbitrary requirement and I humored him. the general discussion is in a general sense and how it holds up on it's own. this isn't about BotW compared to other zelda games, it's about BotW compared to ARPGs in general

Sure, but it stands out more in a game that revolves around exploring a massive world but encountering the same enemies repeatedly, even if they have more moves than past Zeldas. TP's world may be far smaller than BOTW's but you can still encounter enough enemies that each area feels distinct from each other, whereas in BOTW the biggest distinction areas have is what biome they are

Attached: armos_by_deimos_remus-d9zfnop.jpg (1652x2200, 3.22M)

>They aren't enemies so they're irrelevant, it's a moot point.

Yeah of course, lets ignore what BotW brings to the table. Don't want to make the game look better than other Zeldas now do we? That would be damaging to your argument. Can't have that.

Keep squirming lol

>get btfo
>"u-u mad"
kek

Yeah but earlier games were more linear as well :/

how is that a "but"? it's a design choice, open world isn't inherently better

Yeah you are mad lol. You can not stand people enjoying this game for some reason, it's hilarious.

Now you're getting it

there's nothing inherently wrong with linearity in games

Attached: bubble_by_deimos_remus-da91tdx.jpg (1156x1539, 1M)

>Yeah of course, lets ignore what BotW brings to the table.
When the claim is that BotW has no enemy variety, no shit other interactions are irrelevant. It's a red herring.
>Don't want to make the game look better than other Zeldas now do we? That would be damaging to your argument. Can't have that.
Nice Ad hominem.

but I like the game, I'm playing it right now. I seriously don't understand what goes on inside your head

Never said that

then don't word it that way

Attached: lanmola_by_deimos_remus-dadabr6.jpg (1156x1539, 1.46M)

>When the claim is that BotW has no enemy variety, no shit other interactions are irrelevant
Wrong

;)

Shrines are literally everywhere so boosting stamina isn't an issue and there aren't many waterfalls in the game at all.

;-)

I didn't. You are eager to grant concessions to shortcomings of linear design while lambasting open world games for not being linear enough

>I-I-it's artificial progression

lol

I see, (You) don't even have an argument anymore.

Attached: 1555524463553.gif (500x296, 466K)

didn't lambast open world games for not being linear enough, and my main point was variety between areas. If you don't want to compare past Zeldas, then compare it to other open world games like the TES series

Attached: tektite_by_deimos_remus-d9yb58c.jpg (1156x1539, 1.7M)

So why can't the other Zelda games have interactive wildlife like BotW? When it adds so much to the player's immersion? Why don't other Zelda games have that?

I'll save you having to respond; its because those games are different. They're offering a different experience.

Trying to detract from BotW by autistically focusing on a single isolated aspect without taking into consideration all the other factors - let alone contemplating the overall gaming experience - is the height of utter desperation.

>Bro zelda's combat wouldn't work in a game like doom at all so that is why it sucks

lol stop posting

You mean like how it's a billion times better than anything Todd ever shat out?

>The sense of reward and progression is a personal experience different to each player.

I highly doubt that is the case. The gameplay loop is fundamentally the same no matter what direction you end up going in.

Yeah well you're autistic

>a billion
let's not go that high, maybe a thousand

Attached: wallmaster_by_deimos_remus-da516fc.jpg (1156x1539, 1.25M)

No, a billion

>I'll save you having to respond; its because those games are different. They're offering a different experience.
I have no problem with that. There's nothing wrong with the wildlife, but it doesn't add all that much to the game either.
>Trying to detract from BotW by autistically focusing on a single isolated aspect without taking into consideration all the other factors
You tried to present the enemy variety as okay in the game and I took issue with that, so I proved it wrong. I never said anything about any other aspect of the game to you up to now.
>let alone contemplating the overall gaming experience
Each individual core factor contributes to the experience. If one is lacking, it will take away from the whole.

You didn't prove anything though you just disagreed with his opinion. Stop arguing like you have facts on your side when you actually don't ;)

>The gameplay loop is fundamentally the same no matter what direction you end up going in.

No. Some of the best moments in this game are things which happen organically and will be different for each player.

For example, in a regular game, your first encounter with a fully-functioning guardian would a necessary story-triggered cutscene in a specific location. In BotW that could be anywhere and will happy depending on what the player does and where they go. My first encounter was on a mountain side at night in the middle of a thunderstorm. Utterly, utterly terrifying. And it a moment soley for ME.

Breakable weapons was just a thoroughly dumb move. I get that they wanted to encourage you to be creative with how you approach enemy encounters, but their method of "encouragement" was foisting an incredibly annoying durability system on you to -force- you to dick around with the physics engine. I don't think they solved the fundamental issue with this sort of thing which is that, ultimately, using your weapons is often the most efficient and direct way to dispatch a group of enemies than setting up some janky rube goldberg plan that's likely to fuck up.

So, once the initial novelty and fun wears off, there's not much reason to continue doing that sort of thing. Notice how in all B-roll footage of this game in reviews, the gameplay shows Link doing all of the crazy shit very early in the game, not late game. Worse yet, as the game progresses, enemies get so powerful that creatively dispatching enemies becomes almost entirely ineffective, and your only real option becomes your weapons.

That just means I'm right

Attached: 1431221237_candy dance.gif (163x163, 7K)

what is it about nintendo games that makes people so aggressively defensive?

>Each individual core factor contributes to the experience. If one is lacking, it will take away from the whole.

>When the claim is that BotW has no enemy variety, no shit other interactions are irrelevant

SO, what is it?

No, you just didn't like it

Okay sweaty

Probably the two years of autistic shitposts drowning out any abeyance discussion of the game

>After a dozen hours or so, you pretty much have experienced everything the game has to offer.

So you found all the shrines, explored all the towns and completed all the environmental shrine quests in only a dozen hours? Because those are all completely different and not repetitive in the slightest save for maybe combat shribes.

good gameplay coupled with nostalgia, so while the games are enjoyable, people who have been playing them constantly for years on end become extremely attached to them and consider any sign of negativity towards them a personal attack
happens to fans of Mario, DK, Metroid, Mother, etc. but more than anything it happens to fans of Zelda

If you weren't a retard, you'd first realize that I'm focusing on one alone and that it's a negative aspect regardless of what logical fallacy you try to use, then you'd either accept it, or make a thoughtful post explaining your perspective with logic and observations to counter my own.
At this rate, you're no better than the baiting falseflaggers who never fail to shit up BotW threads including this one.

So you fought a enemy that people encounter in other areas in a different place, but your general reaction to the guardian would be the same reaction someone had in a different area when first experiencing the guardian. In reality you had the same experience as everyone else had, just in a different area.

lol cope

I love Kass!

Attached: D1Rm301U0AAVMuY.jpg orig.jpg (2048x2048, 276K)

I'm hopin the next Zelda game builds upon what Breath of the Wild did and we get an even better game that blows our expectations outta the water. I mean why wouldn't they, this game's the best sellin one in the entire fuckin series, and it's universally acclaimed. The only reason people don't is cause they see it coulda been even more, which is fair.

>your general reaction to the guardian would be the same reaction someone had in a different area when first experiencing the guardian.

Wrong again. In the thunderstorm, I couldn't use my weapons because I'd struck by lightening, but the heavy rain also helped me by reducing visability and concealing the sound of my footsteps. Emergant gameplay bay-bee.

But that happens everytime someone is in a thunderstorm

>I mean why wouldn't they
because they don't have to make it better. it's going to sell no matter what, why go out of their way to make it amazing?

They knew the Zelda series was strugglin a little bit, Nintendo's generally pretty conservative and the newest title, for the series, felt like a fuckin quantum leap. Shoulda called it "Breath of Fresh Air"

His point is that his experience of encountering a guardian for the 1st time felt like a unique moment specific to him, occurring organically in the gameplay. Mine was much different to his. Mine was while I was on horseback, galloping across Hyule Field. I was shit scared trying to escape while dodging laser blasts. Do you get it yet?

>hopin
>sellin
>fuckin
>strugglin
what the fuck is wrong with you

So it "felt" unique to him.

I'm not seeing you bringing an argument to the table here dude.

The game is a perfect facade and I don't mean that in a bad way. Every aspect aside from the world itself is just as deep as it needs to be to really blow you away for your first play through.
After you find out how the different aspects of the world work you can easily cheese them, be it combat, crafting ( 1 hearty ingredient for full recovery anyone?), the weapon progression or the riddles.

For me it's just the perfectly "crafted" world. The huge downside of that is that at a second play through it all somewhat falls apart. You get a slightly new angle by exploring a different path or with the slightly higher difficulty of the master mode ( or the additional rule that you are not allowed to eat/drink in combat ). But all in all the game has no real replay value in my opinion. Which isn't necessarily a bad thing, but I yearn for the feeling of that first play through.

Takin off the G's a ood time saver

not posting at all is an even better one. you look like a retard

Whoosh

None of the things you did gameplay sense is unique. He hid. You ran. None of those are unique options. Being frighten by the guardians isn't even a unique experience, since Nintendo purposely set you up to be afraid of Guardians during the tutorial. You two never experienced anything unique, you were just programmed to react that way by how the game set you up. And even during the thunderstorm, you can do what he did with any type of enemy. So nothing you two ever did was unique.

Your feelings are not facts.

Another libtard owned.

Attached: ben-shapiro.jpg (320x320, 7K)

based

>literal redditor
jesus christ

destroyed

Attached: 74574568956.jpg (700x913, 109K)

cope

Attached: 1525804688232.gif (726x400, 85K)

I think that's fine though. Everything is redeemed by that first playthrough magic. Some games aren't meant to be played forever.

Besides, I still feel like BotW sets a new bar for what interactivity should be in a game. That feeling never went away.

What a great and thoughtful response.

So why can't other games be like BotW? Why do other titles feel like interactive movies while BotW feels like a video game?

Yeah, I also think it's fine.
But for me it's a blessing and a curse. It's like a drug that only worked once.
It really raised the bar in certain ways for me, especially these first few hours on the Great Plateau.
The Plateau was an easy 10/10 the rest of the game a solid 9.5/10 for me.

He's gotten to the heart of the issue though. There's a lot of great things breakable weapons adds to the game from a game design standpoint - you can throw weapons, it gets you to scavenge, means a good weapon in multiples is always useful, and many effects outside of just how it works in combat. But fundamentally it's just about liking it. Not having potion neurosis, not caring about permanent progression, enjoying the ability to break a hammer on a Moblin's face.

I liked it. It never bothered me once that weapons were ephemeral. I hope they do it again.

I have a question

Can I climb up a guardian and put a bunch of balloons on it and watch it float up in to the sky?

Or maybe one of those giant rock bosses?

balloons only work on inanimate objects

...he didn't get to the heart of any issue. He didn't address any of my criticisms of the system and simply said "you didn't like it". I don't consider that a thoughtful response.

Yours, on the other hand, is. To address your points--I think that my criticisms still stand. Past a certain point, any good ideas breakable weapons may have brought to the table cease to be relevant, including all of the ones you mentioned:

>throwing weapons
This becomes nearly pointless once enemies become such damage sponges that throwing your weapon hardly does anything, and throwing as a mechanic is generally just relegated to "well my weapon's about to break, guess I'll get in one last chunk of burst damage".

>it gets you to scavenge
Again, this is true early on, but it doesn't take terribly long before you become inundated with inventory space & weapons, and you never need to worry about having a weapon supply ever again. This is especially true once you learn the spots to farm good weapons, like the Major Tests of Strength, and when you get fallbacks like the Master Sword and weapon mounts in your house. I spent WAY more time agonizing over having too many weapons and wondering if I should drop something than I did experiencing the thrill of having to hurriedly find a weapon to use. On that note, having weapons be so disposable trivializes their value as dungeon rewards.

>means a good weapon in multiples is always useful
I don't really have a comment on this--I don't really see it as an inherent benefit, but rather just a consequence of the way the system works.

>and many effects outside of just how it works in combat.
Would you care to elaborate further?

At any rate, I'm not fundamentally against the idea of breakable weapons, but I just think the implementation left a lot to be desired.

Not an argument.

Attached: nSbLMZfU_400x400.jpg (400x400, 22K)

>other titles
like what

My nigga. Deli babas was easily the most notable exclusion. You spend a good chunk of every session of play gathering plants and animal parts. 5-6 different variety’s of deku babas that could camouflage as different collectible plants would be fantastic. Hearty durian snaps off the tree and bites your ass or a world boss that looked like a closed fairy fountain.

>and throwing as a mechanic is generally just relegated to "well my weapon's about to break, guess I'll get in one last chunk of burst damage".
Yeah, that's part of the fun.

You still have to scavenge, it's just different as you progress through the game. And yeah, you have more back up's because progression.

>not understanding unique gameplay experiences comprise a number of things in tandem, not just one thing at a time

You're a moron.

>Yeah, that's part of the fun.
Early on. Then, it's more of a formality against later monsters that take no damage from thrown weapons anyway.

>You still have to scavenge, it's just different as you progress through the game.
Perhaps your definition of scavenge is different from mine. I think of it more as scrounging around for something, especially out of necessity. Meanwhile, mid & late game, the game throws so much equipment at you that more often than not you're having to drop shit or ignore the loot you've found. You're basically getting it just from passively playing the game. Plus, if you know the right strategy, you can just grind out a full inventory of top tier equipment in 10 mins every blood moon.

>And yeah, you have more back up's because progression.
Fair enough, but I think the complaint most people have in this regard is that that sort of progression (that is, getting more inv slots) doesn't feel as rewarding or interesting as finding a new piece of equipment that'll last you. There are armor pieces, of course, but those are few and far between, and generally very limited in their usage. It feels very disheartening to finish a dungeon and get a reward you know will break soon thereafter or that you can't even carry, or, worse yet, a "legendary" weapon that breaks in 5 minutes and you have to go and create infinite replicas. At least the Master Sword recharges.

It never ceases to be relevant. Even though the endgame gear has way too much durability, the system's already done its job by then. The game becoming too easy with lots of preparation doesn't invalidate the entertainment you've got out of up until that point.

The beauty of the system is that there is no need to "farm." You can play the game and use your most powerful weapons without hoarding anything, and the average level of your equipment only goes up over time. It avoids a lot of pitfalls of other open world games: you can't get a permanent disk one nuke to trivialize your playthrough for very long, multiples of good weapons still serve their function instead of becoming vendor trash which gives the world more worthwhile utility items, and inventory management isn't really an issue because of the weapon replenishment rate. The usefulness of weapons and the rates at which they're depleted or acquired help to balance the world and balance exploration. For me, I see no difference in getting a permanently more powerful weapon or having the average level of my inventory go up so that doesn't "trivialize their value" to me at all.

I don't see a downside to this. Rather, it's a key part to how the game keeps you exploring and keeps the combat feeling improvisational, where even basic attacks play into the ebb and flow of resources. This is also why it's important that there's no repair system.

All that needs to be improved for BotW2
>new tile sets for dungeons/shrines (1 per region)
>more enemy types (3-4 per region, 1-2 per dungeon, 2-3 universal)
>more towns like gerudo (feel more alive)
>boss variety (in dungeons, world bosses can be generic looking)
>items instead of/or in addition to runes
>tingle instead of towers to reveal map

Intrinsic vs Extrinsic motivation

>the system's already done its job by then. The game becoming too easy with lots of preparation doesn't invalidate the entertainment you've got out of up until that point.
I guess it's fair to say that you do at least get a lot of unique entertainment value out of the system early on, but my principle complaint is that: A. the system nonetheless lacks a *rewarding* sense of progression and B. it becomes a simple annoyance late game rather than something that forces you to play in an interesting manner. In either case, I don't feel the pros of the system outweigh the cons.

Regarding your second paragraph, and the point you make in your last:
>it's a key part to how the game keeps you exploring and keeps the combat feeling improvisational
I come back around to my original argument which is that, past a certain point (mid to late game), combat is no longer improvisational--enemies simply take too much damage for something goofy like dropping a crate onto them to have any effect. You say "inventory management isn't an issue because of the weapon replenishment rate", so my question is, at that point, is the system even worthwhile? If the game is throwing so many weapons at you that you're never without one (except early on), why not just more spaced out, permanent weapons? Or at least repairable ones? Or at LEAST greater durability than a few minutes of combat?

>It avoids a lot of pitfalls of other open world games: you can't get a permanent disk one nuke to trivialize your playthrough for very long,
This is a fair point, but I think there are better ways to design around this than by having a weapon durability system. For instance, making a particular area extremely difficult. If a low level player is able to traverse an extremely difficult area and retrieve an extremely powerful weapon, they probably A. know what they're doing and B. deserve that reward. If it breaks the game for them, well, it was their own decision to use that weapon.

Linearity is a good thing for Zelda user.

No, not really. Well, to be more specific a zelda game would have a mix.

But open world is not inherently bad