What made it such a milestone in videogame history?

Funny joke

Nothing really it's just the first time Nintendo changed Zelda's core formula since basically SNES days.

>Nintendo defense force

Yeah, because the game really needed "defending".

Attached: 1494887148869.jpg (212x219, 13K)

it was truly a watershed moment in both professional and unpaid shilling

It wasn't. And it would have been the worst 3d Zelda if Skyward Sword didn't exist. It's not even a good open world game.

>It's not even a good open world game.

Attached: 14788766531.jpg (1500x750, 178K)

He's right. It's not.

Irony and sarcasmpilled

Shit taste

Its ok if you don't think its the second coming, but saying its not a good open world game is just complete salt.

Attached: OPENWORLDv.2.png (1920x1080, 935K)

It was the only game for the switch so it was shilled to death by everyone who wanted to justify their little kid games tablet purchase

There's going to be plenty of mental breakdowns when BotW2 comes out and improves over the flaws of the first.

It ain't

Yeah it was "shilled to death" by every corner of the gaming industry.

Attached: Rival_Devs_In_Awe_of_BotW.png (1861x1080, 420K)

First open world game to not tell you where shit is and where to go.
It's something /that/ simple that made it have such an impact.

For over a decade all open world games had the same "map cluttered with waypoints" and "compass pointing you where to go" system because they were afraid of players getting lost. Zelda devs realized that being lost can be fun.

BotW was the first Zelda I've ever dropped, but the one thing it did really well was its world design. It makes you want to explore it, even if that exploration inevitably leads to disappointment.

No, it's legitimately bad.

I didn't care much for it but I won't deny that it's the first game in a long time that feels like it actually places full confidence in the competence of the player. There's places to go but the game doesn't make you go there and techniques/environmental properties to discover but the game doesn't explain any of it beyond the most fundamental stuff. I take issue with some of its ideas in terms of execution but I absolutely do not fault BotW's ambitions by any means.

>First open world game to not tell you where shit is and where to go.
Bzzt. Try again

>and improves over the flaws of the first
Not by me. If they actually do that then I'll be happy. I didn't want to be disappointed in BotW.

Let me rephrase. First MODERN open world game.

Don't know why that was a lesson that needed to be learned as the 3D collectathons of N64 lore already did this, just on a vastly smaller scale.

Okay, so here's the thing.
BotW is very, very far from a perfect game. It's got a lot of shit problems like glass weapons, only having the one aesthetic for shrines and the four dungeons, trivialized difficulty as soon as you find the goddamn Durian grove, etc. The lack of overall meaningful rewards for exploring the content other than the subjective value of just experiencing the content is probably the one that is most likely to crash someone's enjoyment of the game.

However, the reason people can still maintain that BotW shit all over the Open World genre is because of how it approached the player's ability to interact with the world, and how the focus is on the sense of exploration. The way the game is designed around the notion that "if you think this should work, it probably will" is extraordinarily satisfying. Even little details like the camera pulling way back from Link and, while always keeping his location on the screen obvious, deemphasizing him in favor of showing the world better goes a long way. BotW keeps getting held up as this paragon that all Open World should take cues from despite its flaws because, as a system, as a fundamental premise, it's an absolutely wondrous exemplification of how an Open World should work, that's only held back by the actual content of the world itself. People who played BotW and think about it mostly in terms of how it plays, and the promise of the fundamental system are going to be at odds with people who focus in on what playing actually gets you and how well the game fulfilled its premise. Basically, imagine if you had Mario, with his highly refined movement and platforming potential, but the levels themselves didn't have the chops to make full use of Mario.

Breath of the Wild 2 is probably going to get a lot of people to admit that Breath of the Wild had so many glaring flaws and didn't make the full use of its brilliant concept, because they're probably going to make much better use of it the second time around.

Attached: file.png (900x506, 492K)

My point was botw doesnt tell you where to go and less than other games.

Gaming got more popular and more casuals were playing than ever before, so devs thought they had to make their games braindead retarded to compensate.

>Breath of the Wild 2 is probably going to get a lot of people to admit that Breath of the Wild had so many glaring flaws and didn't make the full use of its brilliant concept, because they're probably going to make much better use of it the second time around.

Please fucking God, yes. BotW was a potential 10/10 brought down to like a 7 because for every brilliant revamp it applied to the series there was a concept that fucked things up worse than they already were. It was a good first try and I see the masterpiece that can be made of its foundation but I think people blew their loads far too quickly when sucking BotW off.

dig bicks

Completely frontloaded, making it extremely easy to review well.

A nice tech demo that starts as 10/10 and falls off rapidly after the great plateau as it repeats everything over and over again and barely ever ramps up or introduces new elements to play around with, because the "have all abilities, go everywhere and can do everything from the start" concept doesn't allow that.

Use the engine in a Zelda game with varied far larger dungeons of varying difficulty (oh and also maybe add enemies back to them), and reintroduce unlockable critical abilities (i.e tools) and maybe I'll buy BotW2.

It literally doesn't tell where you to go outside of the main quest, which you can ignore for as much as you want because there's no progression blockers unlike other games. You can fuck off in any direction you want without being stopped (even the Great Plateau can be skipped with clever use of the game's tools). Then there's the fact that the entire map is hidden from you from the start so you have to actually look for things with your eyes. Even if you do the Sheikah Towers, unlike Ubisoft games they only reveal the topographical map, they don't add a bunch of markers or waypoints telling you where everything is. In fact, the only markers the game puts on the map are shrines and towns AFTER you've discovered them. One thing I enjoyed about BotW was adding my own markers to things I'd discovered so I could remember where bosses were and treasure was.

>"But if a game is telling you to do specific things, with marks on a map, and a sequence of which things to do and specific instructions. You're not discovering a world. You're being taken on a tour. You are no longer a pioneer adventurer. You're a guest at Disneyland."

It's the ultimate example of a shit game convincing people it's good, it achieved this on a level skyrim could never hope to achieve.

>Basically, imagine if you had Mario, with his highly refined movement and platforming potential, but the levels themselves didn't have the chops to make full use of Mario.

I like to call this the Resident Evil 6 problem. As much as people love to shit on the game there's little denying that it's exemplary on a mechanical level for third person shooters. Problem is, the level design never properly facilitate the possibilities that those mechanics entail so while the game lets you do all this cool shit, the stages are so poorly designed that it brings down the overall experience. That said, I don't think BotW has it nearly as bad as RE6, which really just suffered from an identity crisis more than anything else, but I get what you're saying and I do ultimately agree that it could've done better in that respect.

Disneyland sounds better than an open field littered with same-y mini and micro games.

Are you agreeing with me or not? The image indicates so but you put >shilled to death
In "---" so my memes are all fucked up. Also, yt was finally recognised as a "influential" platform in the years before the games release so every game ytber including dunkey shilled to get a chance to shake Mr. Nintendo-kuns hand for the epic ad revenue and childhood dream fufillment, it's a good game but like all open world games, sits on the shelf forever once you're done

If they can properly represent ganondorf in gave and give him a proper final area/final fight than in botw ill be happy. Apart from hyrule warriors hes had no proper representation lately and it makes me sad cos hes one of my fav villains.

first open world game for nintendies

Being an okay-ish game and having Zelda in the title.

What does the shiny flicker in the top right of some of my items mean?

Attached: CEMU Screenshot 2019.06.15 - 05.03.21.32.png (1920x1080, 551K)

As someone who cut their teeth on Banjo-Kazooie as a kid, I'm compelled to disagree. It is interesting to see how devs have treated world exploration as games have gotten larger since the days of that game, though.

Very well put user. Too bad everyone will ignore this.

Nintendo made it

If I remember, that means it hasn't lost any durability yet.

Equip it and find out.

Cringe.

Shit sorry. OP here, meant to post this

Attached: dark-souls-blog-890x606.jpg (890x606, 140K)

>milestone
ok

I still see my friends going back to BOTW.

Journos with nostalgia boners.

Honestly the online component was more relevant than anything else Dark Souls did, which was basically be an action RPG that expected you to have half a brain.

Fair enough, anecdotal too but mine sold their switches after they finished because of how underwhelmed they felt by the end

Lack of competent competition I suppose. Although the freedom of the game did genuinely impress me. The last time a game impressed me like that was Portal.

m,akes sense thnx

No, the whole "be an action RPG that expected you to have half a brain." thing was extremely relevant at the time, since most gaming companies were laboring under the assumption that you couldn't successfully sell a game if you didn't try your damnedest to sell it to people who had only one tenth of a brain too. Dark Souls represented a milestone in gaming just for breaking a tide and giving the industry some well needed perspective.

>long ass paragraph
>only argument given when all the fluff is taken out is "if you think you can do something, you probably can"

Which is the same as many games within their own systems, and just like those other games these are things you will hardly ever do or try since the dominant strategy is to just whack and shoot thing with sword/bow. (or just run away because there is no benefit to fighting anything in the game)

>It literally doesn't tell where you to go outside of the main quest, which you can ignore for as much as you want
Like other open world games
>unlike other games
Unlike some. All? No. Most? Nah
>you can fuck off in any direction you want.
So could Daggerfall

>the map opens up and locations appear on the map after visiting them
Yeah, world first.

So you're whole thing comes down to a lack of markers.

>Daggerfall
I'm talking about modern games, retard.

The design of the Divine Beasts actually is fairly clever though, especially in comparison to most 3D Zelda dungeons

That's hardly a milestone, just a reshifting of the tides back to when games tried harder to respect the player's intelligence. To that end I do believe Dark Souls is indeed relevant but a milestone? Nah, a mere shift in sensibilities and little else. Also, Demon's did this whole thing before Dark did, it just so happens that Dark was when people started paying attention.

Oh so BOTW is groundbreaking for doing basic shit games have done forever?

So Daggerfall doesn't count? How about Skyrim, Morrowind, Fallout, GTA, RDR, AssCreed, etc etc etc?

You're blowing smoke up this games ass just because it's Zelda. Admit it.

People calling a game shit isnt seething. If it was Yea Forums would be seething constantly from all the games it calls shit.

You can tell this game is garbage because tendies have to defend it every chance they get. The insecurity is real.

>Oh so BOTW is groundbreaking for doing basic shit games have done forever?
It's groundbreaking for having the balls to return to what games used to be like before they treated the player like an invalid.
>Skyrim, Morrowind, Fallout, GTA, RDR, AssCreed, etc etc etc?
Literally none of those games do what I described.

One mini-puzzle involving movement of some part of the beast itself does not make them clever. it's interesting and could have been done better, but nothing in this game comes close to any Majora's Mask temple.

the sequel is just gonna be the same game with 10 dungeons and more boss fights along with more gadgets to explore with. oh and muh ganon.

i doubt they're really going to improve combat or tone down weapon vulnerability.

it's a regressive iteration of a classic franchise within a regressive age

If it was all 4 divine beasts merged into one dungeon I'd agree with you. As it stands it just felt like they were copy pasted glorified shrines. Even the method to get into them felt nearly identical.

Not that user but yes and no. Players absolutely experimented with BotW's mechanics and found some neat shit BUT there is little arguing that you can get through the game playing it like an old fashioned Zelda. It does completely miss the game's supposed appeal but at the same time maybe it's a failing on the game's part that said experimentation isn't more critical to success, really only there to sate curious minds. That's actually an issue I had with the game myself, I do wish it pushed the idea of its experimental potential harder than it did and forced me to think outside the box more often.

Yea Forums is clearly seething all the time dude. I thought it was obvious.
Open up a thread right now about how much you enjoyed RE2 Remake and watch what happens.

Remember. Everytime you see someone shill this children's game think of the person behind the screen.

Attached: 1515349427704.jpg (489x623, 64K)

You're forgetting the fact that it's also a puzzle game, thanks to all the shrines, where the game rewarding you for logically following through on its mechanics also applies. One of the easiest examples to give is that, once you know you can be electrocuted for holding a metal weapon, you can expect the game to treat metal weapons as conductive in all circumstances. So there are a few puzzles where you need to route some electricity from one panel to another, which usually involves manipulating metal blocks. You can figure out how the game wants you to position everything and solve the puzzle, or you can make a line of greatswords from one side of the room to the other and it works too, because the game respects the internal logic of it.

Similarly, one of my favorite dumb workarounds for a dungeon was a ball-in-the-cup sort of puzzle where you had to send an orb down a ramp and use wind to send it to the socket so that the elevator you were standing on would raise up and allow you to progress. Or, and this is what I did, you can chuck the orb at the socket, stasis it right before it goes in, and then get on the elevator and release the stasis.

The fact that it has a bunch of puzzles where you're not required to decipher whatever one cryptic solution the devs intended and can just freely construct your own solution is where this style of gameplay shines best. Also, I think you glossed over the argument about how the game prioritizes the world over Link, because that ideology carries through to most of the decisions the game makes. It's such a subtle thing in most of the situations where it applies, but it puts a lot of effort into making sure that it doesn't get in your way.

I'd rather see the person behind all the soiboy posts.
>NOOOOOOOO STOP ENJOYING THINGS I DONT LIKE!!!!!1!
>IF YOU LIKE SOMETHING I DONT LIKE YOU MUST LOOK LIKE THIS!!1!
Honestly this is so pathetic I just need a picture to go with these masterpieces.

New Zelda game for the new console like all the rest.

(you)

Attached: 1522219497659.png (233x204, 88K)

BotW is the biggest departure from tradition the series has seen since A Link to the Past, arguably Zelda II.

Attached: confused looking anime girls with interrogation marks on their heads.png (186x208, 28K)

And I hate that. Threw the baby out with the bathwater. Should've been a new IP.
I'll take that back if BotW2 fixes things. I'm trying to keep an open mind.

Understated and contemplative mood, uncommon for big budget mainstream games, where the player is expected to slowly traverse a ruined world.
Focus almost purely on game-play rather than extraneous story, and general dedication to being a game rather than an unlimited toy box (mostly through stamina management, weapon degradation, the struggle of climbing, the player starting out quite weak and having to carefully navigate the world)
Goes the extra mile for balancing (weapon durability)
Goes out of its way to impress upon the player the sheer sale of its world, in a way that no other game to my memory (other than maybe SotC) has done
Integrates the player's progression with the non-linear structure of the game (learning specific mechanics through shrines dedicated to that mechanic in any order they wish, the player being able to complete shrine puzzles with multiple solutions depending on their own creativity, finding the memories scattered throughout the world and piecing together the narrative)
Its "Family relations" - how different mechanics weave together, sometimes in unexpected ways that reward the player for creativity and resourcefulness

Pretty much my sentiments to a T.

Attached: 7493.jpg (640x480, 137K)

The game makes you combine those mechanics you learn on the Great Plateau in different ways all the time afterwards, though. Reintroducing linear "unlockable tools" seems like a good incentive to fall back onto the stale Zelda formula, whereas BotW struck a happier balance with the abilities you unlock through the Divine Beasts

You let other guys bang your fat girlfriend huh

I like to think that people forgave most of the flaws due to what botw did well. The games did fall apart for me a little bit into post game though as you finally starting really understanding how everything works and suddenly the world is extremely exploitable and broken.

Why

No, I am a fat girlfriend.

>What made it such a milestone in videogame history?

Nintendo fanboys refusing to play anything outside Nintendo's ecosystem so think that 10 year old game design is a milestone.

>The first open world game to have good level design.

Dark Souls is open world and pisses all over BotW.

Attached: 1544950609109.jpg (1500x1862, 551K)

>Dark Souls is open world and pisses all over BotW.
That game isn't open world

>tfw no fat gf

>Dark Souls is open world

Attached: bait low quality.jpg (100x100, 2K)

Ocarina of Time is the best Zelda game. BoTW is just a ubisoft clone.

If you think Dark Souls is open world in the same sense, your definition of open world game is so far disconnected from everyone else's that your opinion is invalid.

The game is truly actually open world in approach and design, it feels natural in its flow. If you can think of something to try, nine times out of ten it will work.

Also the way the starting plateau was designed was great -- it was linear, but it was so masterfully done that the player felt they figured it out for themselves. Consider - you do the magnet shrine, then the bomb shrine. After that you explore and find the time stop shrine. After that -- you naturally are inclined to climb down the mountain this shrine resides upon (as it looks nice and they put stops on it for the player on the way down too, as well as mushrooms), which leads you to the Old Man's cabin at the bottom which has a cookery pot there. Along the way to the time stop shrine you will likely have picked up the hot peppers which you can cook at the pot to make the cold resistance food, which you need to reach the last shrine before you can leave.

And all of this, despite being laid out in a linear fashion, is not obvious to the player -- they feel like they figured out this all by themselves, by being at once in the world and in the game. If you get what I mean.

>tendies who haven't play anything besides their children's games

Nothing, nboody is influenced by it except from Ubisoft.

RDR2 is the true milestone. Even Nintendo agrees

Attached: 1560303345748.jpg (1439x1516, 570K)

copy pasted cringe. I get a feeling all these shill threads are just made by the same autist.

DELETE

>Dark Souls represented a milestone in gaming just for breaking a tide and giving the industry some well needed perspective.

While Dark Souls is the game that gets all the credit, Demon Souls is the actual game that made the first crack. Thanks to the praise that game got Bandai Namco seized on the difficulty angle with their marketing.

Based. Rockstar were always the true open world developers. Nintendo doesn't even come close.

Oh nononononon.

>First CDPR says that they want Cyberpunk 2077 to be like RDR2
>then Fromsoft come out and say that they're looking to RDR2 for influence in their upcoming game
>now even fucking Nintendo is listing it as an influence

Yea Forums LIED TO ME

Attached: 1560377713455.gif (500x368, 2.97M)

Attached: AD91C3ED-2D2C-48FE-8FBE-516B3588E3A7.jpg (1400x700, 159K)

Nice.

>the starting plateau was linear
No it wasn't. It was just smaller in scale than the rest of the world.

It took one of the biggest old franchises and reshaped the gamplay on a fundamental level. It lost the dungeons that defined it before but delivered the best open world experience of its kind with deep, fun and polished gameplay in a very finely crafted massive world with plenty of exploration encouraged.
It gave us a different form of Zelda adventure flavour than what we were used to, there was nothing like it out there.

Are you just copypasting shit now?

Yes. The autist literally has no life. He's on Yea Forums all day copy pasting BotW posts. Just ignore him.

*scale of its world

>within their own systems
Yeah, and their own systems suck ASS, that's the fucking problem. They claim to be OPEN world, but they're barely open since you can't do what you want.

>That game isn't open world
>If you think Dark Souls is open world in the same sense, your definition of open world game is so far disconnected from everyone else's that your opinion is invalid.

It is because open world is defined by it's routes and order of completion. You're just salty that it's been done better elsewhere years ago so it's now a dick wagging competition who allows more freedom on terrain. If Dark Souls isn't open world then neither is the very first Zelda game.

Attached: 1547270730318.png (3000x2987, 1001K)

Nice.

interesting. It might have something to do with their interest level in Nintendo games to begin.

>You can figure out how the game wants you to position everything and solve the puzzle, or you can make a line of greatswords from one side of the room to the other and it works too, because the game respects the internal logic of it.
I didn't know you could do that, that's so cool

It gave you a list of tasks and left you the fuck alone to do them your way basically.

Attached: 1556076911384.jpg (500x497, 42K)

BotW doesn't have levels you absolute nigger. If you're thinking about shrines or beasts you're wrong again since those were terribly designed

>those were terribly designed
They weren't though. How were they terribly designed

It made all the open-world ""gamers"" (read GTAfags) play babby's first Zelda game.

>Great combat

Yeah, I love having to open a menu to switch armor, eat a meal, whack enemies with a sword 2 times till it breaks, then spend 30 seconds trying to find the next weakest weapon to use to be efficient, then hit an enemy 2 more times. Weapon breaks again, spend 5 seconds deciding on a rune, then spend 10 seconds finding another weapon. Truly mesmerizing combat.

Don't even get me on the breathtaking dungeons. Figuring which of the 5 runes to use is so goddamn difficult, especially when the name of the dungeon even tells you the answer.

>It is because open world is defined by it's routes and order of completion.
The world being interconnected doesn't mean it's open. Dark Souls has progression gates all over the place.

Attached: 1423009100115.jpg (228x238, 13K)

I don’t know. I didn’t bother to play the shit game.

It could use some now. It's getting destroyed by objectivity

>Don't even get me on the breathtaking dungeons. Figuring which of the 5 runes to use is so goddamn difficult, especially when the name of the dungeon even tells you the answer.
Combining the use of five tools in different ways can lead to a fair amount of complexity, though. At least moreso that most 3D Zelda dungeons, where it's very clear that one tool will help you solve most of the puzzles in one dungeon

Woah another Tendie trying to impersonate me. Fucking hilarious how butthurt you people are to stoop to this level

1. Great Plateau was a great tutorial area that gave you a chance to get familiar with Link's moveset and abilities in a relatively safe space. It also acted as a microcosm of the entire game to give you a taste of what to expect. And it taught you all of this with minimal handholding or dialogue, it just let the player experience things for themselves.

2. After completing the first 4 shrines and getting the paraglider, you were free to do what you like. You could go straight to the final boss if you wanted, you could seek out the divine beasts to get additional abilities, you could seek out shrines to get additional health/stamina, you could seek out the memories to learn more about Link and Zelda's past. It's a big difference from other open world games that usually just railroad the player to go to specific towns or cities. As soon as you felt like the game was offering nothing new, you could then go straight to Ganon.

3. The paraglider and climbing mechanics introduced a layer of vertical movement to Link's movement options. Being able to travel in all 6 direction (instead of the usual 4 compass directions) meant that you could truly go anyway you like.

4. The puzzles in the game are heavily linked to the physics engine of the game rather than just being shitty "push the correct button to progress". The game has a small set of fundamental "forces" (e.g. fire, electricity, water, ice, wind, kinetic energy) and different objects interact with this forces in different ways.

5. The enemies, while small in variety, all have very natural and fairly complex behaviour. Scouts will alert sleeping enemies in their camps, when they notice an enemy they will go to pick up their weapons, they'll throw mud at you or resort to range attacks if you take their weapon or you're out of melee reach. They'll set their weapon on fire to make them deal more damage, they'll be alerted to sound or projectiles and will go to investigate if they haven't seen you yet.

> If you can think of something to try, nine times out of ten it will work.

Ok, I'll try diving in the enormous amount of water this game has. Oh wait.

So does Zelda 1, the linchpin of open world design.

>So does Zelda 1
No it doesn't. Right from the start of the game count how many areas on the world map (not dungeons) you can't get to without getting certain items or beating certain bosses, then look at DaS and count the number of areas you can't go to from the start without getting certain items or beating certain bosses and see which number is higher.

user said 9 times out of 10. Tried visiting the moon, hit the skybox.

>well designed 2D overworlds are the same as massive, soulless open worlds filled with procedurally generated filler!
Dilate

Dark Souls is a series of interconnected confined areas. If your interpretation of open world is broad enough to include it, you need to reconsider what you think open world means.

It isn't.

>then look at DaS and count the number of areas you can't go to from the start without getting certain items or beating certain bosses and see which number is higher.

After the Asylum Demon tutorial boss there's:-

1. Taurus Demon
2. Bell Gargoyle
3. Capra Demon
4. Moonlight Butterfly
5. Sif
6. Quelaag
7. Pinwheel
8. Second Asylum Demon Boss

Areas you can go to after the tutorial boss:-

1. Firelink Shrine
2. Undead Berg
3. Undead Parish
4. Lower Undead Berg
5. New Londo Ruins
6. Valley of Drakes
7. Darkroot Garden
8. Darkroot Basin
9. Catacombs
10. Blighttown
11. Undead Asylum

This is definitively open world and more open world than most Zelda games. Suck it up, open world has been done better years before BotW came out.

Attached: 1547945334850.jpg (1820x1024, 335K)

>count the areas that are locked out
>does not count the areas that are locked out
>counts Blighttown from the start, an area that's only accessible with a certain item
"No"

No what you are doing is trying to make the case that the more aimless the world is the more open world it is.

Never before had a game blatantly stolen so many features and design concepts from so lany different IPs

You don't need the key to gain access to Blighttown, you can go through big gates in New Londo Ruins, you just have to kill the NPC for the key.

Imagine being such a pathetic nintendie that you feel the need to unironically defend a video game on an online anonymous website

>You don't need a key, you just need a key
Okay.

>you just have to kill the NPC for the key.
>Right from the start of the game count how many areas on the world map (not dungeons) you can't get to without getting certain items or beating certain bosses

No, I'm just pointing out that you're using a term in a way that doesn't really conform to how everyone else uses it, which devalues any argument you could make using it.

My point is that you have multiple ways to progress without the need to kill bosses. If you're going to use that argument then I'll use the Plateau and the Sheikah slate with it's tools that you have to get in different shrines.

>Bu..bu...bu... open world after it.

Whatever you fucking hypocrites.

Attached: 1547757387293.jpg (500x500, 94K)

>a shit game convincing people it’s good

what in god’s actual fuck hole does this mean? “people dont actually have fun playing the game! the game just makes them THINK theyre having fun.”

It's a half decent open world game in a sea of shit ones, which I suppose is revolutionary considering the absolute state of modern game development. It's simply the king of the trash heap and people will eventually realize that it's not outstanding in any particular way, if they haven't already.

Attached: wiener.jpg (198x254, 16K)

>My point is that you have multiple ways to progress without the need to kill bosses.
Most of the world is locked out from the start, and you need to get items to progress.

>B-But the Plateau!
I'm not counting that, just like I'm not counting the start of DaS before Firelink. If most of the world is locked off from the start once you get out into the "main" world, then it's not an open world game.

Plebs who can't into game design will always be baffled by BotW's acclaim.

Attached: 1552128320635.webm (640x1136, 2.09M)

lol what even is this claim youre trying make right now

its not open world because it has a tutorial?

Are you actually retarded or can you just not read English? It's not open world because after the tutorial, most of the game is blocked off. You can not get to most of the areas without beating bosses or picking up items.

And did them better

There are still barriers to entry in BotW though. Again this is a dick wagging contest about who has the most freedom in an open world rather than who does open world better. You've set the open world barrier so arbitrarily high that you've taken well known open world games out of the category that they are well known for it, even defining the open world genre like Metroid and exploration Castlevania games. You just don't like the idea of BotW competing with open world games like Dark Souls because doing that means you acknowledge that a game did open world better much earlier than BotW.

Attached: 1539251186138.jpg (1500x1026, 285K)

>There are still barriers to entry in BotW though
How many parts of the world map are blocked off, compared to how many areas of the map in DaS are blocked off?

>even defining the open world genre like Metroid and exploration Castlevania games.
Nevermind, you're too stupid to argue with.

I FUCKING LOVE MEN

I love coming to Botw threads and seeing the amount of hoops people will jump through rather than just admit Nintendo made a good game.

Attached: 1560156411224.jpg (950x534, 39K)

Metroidvania's aren't typically considered open world either retard.

You have to talk to an NPC and complete several shrines and a tower to get off the tutorial area and talk to to many NPC's to gain access to certain areas, the Garudo section for a start requires you to disguise yourself as a female. This is all barrier to entry shit, stop pretending it doesn't exist.

nvm, i didnt realize you guys were talking about games besides botw. please excuse my intrusion; carry on

The old man is part of a tututorial, thats it. As for Gerudo City, who don't have do it. You can ignore it and move on. Thats how much freedom you have. Its not a barrier to progession.

nintendo draws inspiration from other games, and then does it better

The problem is, you have to stretch the definition of open world so thin to be able to include Dark Souls that you lose any significant point of reference that makes a comparison possible. It'd be like if people were discussing what makes for the best shirt and then you barge in insisting that the best shirt would obviously be a flak jacket.

The World Design. Everything else is really underdeveloped, but Hyrule itself is pretty sweet.

You can tell this game is good because self-loathing boomers that didnt grow up with good games have to attack it every chance they get. The insecurity is real.*

there, fixed it for you

It really just needed dungeons. Fuck, I'd even settle for an underground catacomb dungeon. That'd be neat

>Its not a barrier to progession.

It is if you want to enter the Divine Beasts. You have to do many things in BotW to gain access to certain areas.

I've already explained that open world is defined by it's routes and order of completion and I've shown the areas and bosses you can do the minute you land in Firelink Shrine which is a hell of a lot more than most Zelda games. It seems though I've got anons who think that an open world game is truly open world when it's content is near enough aimless.

Attached: 1546397842769.png (599x599, 427K)

The weapons breaking

>I like climbing towers

But there is nothing to find. Just some rupees, weapons and armor that will break in 2 minutes

lazy bait, heres your reply

>he thinks there are rupees in the open world

you just outed yourself as never having played it. goodbye

>It is if you want to enter the Divine Beasts.
>if
>you
>want
>to

>specific missions within the open world require you to do specific things

what the fuck even is your point right now, dude? every open world game has more specific/particular missions within the game. that doesnt make them any less open world

>you don't have to enter the divine beasts to begin with since you can just go straight for Ganon
Point invalid.

>If you want to leave the Plateau
>If
>you
>want
>to

I can do that too. You still keep on avoiding the point that there are barriers to entry in BotW.

Attached: 1508312191576.jpg (618x597, 144K)

You can leave the tutorial area without doing the tutorial if you're creative enough.

I didnt like it at all

What's always struck me as interesting is you don't even need the stuff they force you to complete the plateau for. You can get to and beat ganon without any of the runes or the glider.

Here, let's give an example of how your idea of open world has dissolved any relevant frame of reference between the two games.

You keep saying Dark Souls does open world "better", but you've yet to qualify that statement in any way. Let's give two examples of how both games approach a similar situation, and you can make your case for which is better.
>You need to make your way through a castle in order to reach a certain location where a boss fight is, preceding a meeting with a princess.

In Dark Souls, you must follow a specific route across narrow walkways while being pelted with arrows the size of a lance until you can get into a side entrance, then progress through alternating narrow corridors and interior rooms staffed by hostile knights, until you reach the castle's lobby and can proceed into the boss fight.

In Zelda, you start on the outskirts of the castle, surrounded by ruined barracks and walls that can provide cover as you approach the castle past a barrage of lasers. You can choose any side of the castle to approach from, even attempting to scale the sides. There's a route through the innards of the castle, requiring you to fight or evade numerous foes, or you can attempt to bypass this by ascending the outer walls, which leave you exposed to more lasers. At the pinnacle of the castle, you can finally approach the boss.

Which of these is the "better" way of doing it?

>BotW
>stuck on plateau tutorial area
>finish it
>can explore pretty much anywhere outside of small quest specific locations

>DS
>stuck in asylum tutorial area
>finish it
>massively gated from many areas of the world without following going out of your way to find or kill shit

In BotW I can just fucking travel all the way to Akkala, ez
In Dark Souls I can't just wonder over to the collection of world zones that are Sen's Fortress, Anor Londo, Duke's Archives, Crystal Caves, very necessary places to go to

To be honest its only been two years, we need some distance before we can fully appreciate BotW's impact. But its easy to say it's one of the most important games of the generation. If someone wanted to say it was the best game of the generation, an educated mind have to acknowledge that opinion even if they didn't accept it.

Attached: 1537187977207.png (900x506, 683K)

It saved Nintendo as a hardware manufacturer.

>he actually thinks barriers to entry = not an open world

i think the best thing botw has done is its exposed the most intellectually stagnated bottom feeders that frequent this board, and given us a keen and fascinating insight into just how insufficiently their brains work

There being a few barriers to entry is a trivial point compared to the fact that areas in Dark Souls are distinct, separate confined spaces. When you enter Anor Londo, it is always from the same location. You always have to go down the stairs, you always have to use the spiral elevator, you always have to traverse the rafters, you always have to go past the archers. It's linear progression. What you're thinking is just straight up not what people mean when they say open world. You're trying to impose your own definition of the genre onto the conversation and it's just completely incorrect.

the truth is, open world rpgs are the greatest form of games there are, as opposed to traditional fighting games, which are the worst form of a game

Why is it ALWAYS soulsfags do this shit.

It doesn't get enough credit for this.

I'm not even that big of a creative person, that said Master Mode for this game forced me to be so. Regenerating enemies and gold foes that take a long time to hit on combat can easily be dealt with with enough creativity, be launching a tree at them or bashing them with metal, or even overthrowing them and dump them into water, creativity shines over brute forcing your way, and it's great

Dark Souls is absolutely a Metroidvania, not an Open World game.
No open world has such restrictive and narrow level design, for better or worse.

Those are not my words in green text.

>what the fuck even is your point right now, dude?

Pay attention to the thread. I said Dark Souls is open world and does it better than BotW. There are anons here who say it isn't open world because of their arbitrary definition that keys and bosses stop it even though there are plenty of sequence breaking options. My response to them is that you have to talk to NPC's in BotW to gain access to certain areas as talking to NPC's is basically a key to progression. In the end it's come to a dick wagging contest from the BotW fags because to them BotW is the true open world game which is kinda funny as it would make it the only open world game in retrospective compared to all other games.

Attached: 1554555945204.jpg (680x1152, 88K)

It's not a milestone of anything

>I've already explained that open world is defined by it's routes and order of completion
This just in, Super Mario 64 is Open World.

>copy pasted
Are zoomers so fucking braindead that they think taking 90 seconds to write out a barely passable paragraph is so long that it suffices to be copy pasted? MORON.

first open world game with true movement freedom, allowing you to travel to, up, over, around and through anything you can see

open world game that actually has right character controls

large world with special attention paid to sound design for everything from what you're stepping on to animal noises to wind to grass, dynamically

very careful outdoor design, such that at any point there are multiple visible points of interest to encourage exploration and reward discovery

satisfying encounters that reward puzzle-solving, planning, and emergent gameplay

a physics engine that works well and allows for really creative problem-solving

character progression based on mastery of skills acquired in the first hour of the game and intelligent use of those skills

a cooking system that is fairly vital and rewarding to pursue

a storyline that encourages the player to pursue the secrets of the world and piece together what happened in the past

characters you genuinely care about, and a princess zelda you actually want to save

plenty of non-quest things to do without directing the player with sidequests and excessive map-marking, allowing the player to explore the map at their own pace and discover interesting interactions, npcs, and points of interest on their own

decent challenge with the option of vigorous challenge

i honestly don't understand how anyone can hate on this game, it elevates the entire open-world genre and will encourage more thoughtful, entertaining, and immersive design for every other studio moving forward. it's an excellent example of why east/west cross-pollination is great for video games.

Fuck, I think Super Mario Bros in general is open world since I can use shortcuts and the like to skip to other worlds prematurely

>Dark Souls is a better Open World game than BotW

You fuckin' wot mate?

>you have to talk to NPCs to progress
No you really don't. If you're not trying to be creative, and follow the tutorial, you are forced to talk to one and only one NPC in the tutorial area being the King, from that point the tutorial is over and you can go straight to Ganon, without needing to talk to anyone else
That's what freedom is like for an open world game.

Not all areas in Dark Souls are a funnel, there are multiple routes within the levels themselves, Darkroot Garden for example is incredibly open plan, same with Catacombs though that takes a heavy emphasis on vertical options of progression.

Attached: 1547938440982.jpg (320x400, 27K)

>I said Dark Souls is open world
Because you have the most broad, ridiculously vague interpretation of what open world means. You're very belligerently insisting on a definition that shares nothing in common with the general consensus on the term.

>Open World/Sandbox same

Attached: FB_IMG_1560600278170.jpg (504x645, 19K)

Open world is about having the freedom to explore the whole world, even if there's occasionally a quest you have to do along the way. You have stuff like GTA (who's gonna anger this dude )
where you might be barred from going across the entire map without progressing through missions, but you still have a "world" to explore and mess around with. If you say, that fucking around in firelink shrine and undead burg is the same thing, you're sou out of touch it's not funny. Even with multiple entrances, they're still limited, and some entrances are gated until you take other specific paths and routes to get where you want, with barely any freedom.

A few examples of branching paths within a confined area still doesn't make it open world game design.

thanks for taking the time to spell out your argument for me. i am a bit retarded, and legitimately have not understood anything that was going on with this conversation until now.

open world categorization is more of a spectrum, dont you think? a world can be less open or more open, but still be open, rendering it an open world game nonetheless.

that being said, id say there are attractive things about Dark Souls’ interpretation of an open world, and attractive things about BoTW’s interpretation. some of these things are shared, some arent. i suppose i just liked BoTW’s interpretation better, but thats just me. and everyone youve been arguing with, i guess.

>Dark Souls is open world

Attached: r1zr3jm86ba11.jpg (550x543, 83K)

I'm referring to the open world itself. Also the shrines were great. God you are idiot.

It's the first open world game that is as interactive as its format deserves.

It lacks content, we miss features from other games in the series, and some of the sacrifices hurt too much, but in exchange, it's the first open world game were said huge world doesn't feel like static(albeit) atrezzo but the fundamental part of the experience. That's why it resonates with so many people despite its flaws. What there is, is so very tangible compared to other more realistic looking worlds and doing mundane stuff is engageing.

Attached: pepepolitoed.png (986x1150, 197K)

>Because you have the most broad, ridiculously vague interpretation of what open world means

It's not fucking broad, multiple routes and sequence breaking is the 101 of open world design to do things in the order you want. Seriously stop treating being near to the point of aimless in an open world as the only definition of open world.

>If you say, that fucking around in firelink shrine and undead burg is the same thing, you're sou out of touch it's not funny

Read these options you have before you @ me.

>After the Asylum Demon tutorial boss there's:-

>1. Taurus Demon
>2. Bell Gargoyle
>3. Capra Demon
>4. Moonlight Butterfly
>5. Sif
>6. Quelaag
>7. Pinwheel
>8. Second Asylum Demon Boss

>Areas you can go to after the tutorial boss:-

>1. Firelink Shrine
>2. Undead Berg
>3. Undead Parish
>4. Lower Undead Berg
>5. New Londo Ruins
>6. Valley of Drakes
>7. Darkroot Garden
>8. Darkroot Basin
>9. Catacombs
>10. Blighttown
>11. Undead Asylum

>This is definitively open world and more open world than most Zelda games. Suck it up, open world has been done better years before BotW came out.

Attached: 1544489251812.png (753x753, 606K)

this.

the focus was put less on the size and “lushness” of the world, and more with the actual feeling you have while traversing the world

>Dark Souls is open world
Nope.

>If you're thinking about shrines or beasts you're wrong again since those were terribly designed
>beasts were terribly designed

And you want anyone with a brain to take you seirously? When they were terribly designed, there isn't even a SINGLE well designed game out there, let alone on your dilatestation.

Attached: best dungeon.webm (640x360, 2.9M)

made a playable survival game using an iconic character

>It's not fucking broad, multiple routes and sequence breaking is the 101 of open world design to do things in the order you want.
That is not at all what people mean when they say open world. You're presenting basically having any amount of choice in how you go through a level or the order you go through levels in as being open world. You are asserting a definition that is not the same as what basically anyone else uses.

kys lol

Attached: 1551634134960.webm (1024x576, 2.7M)

The game was mediocore. Once the sequel comes out and improves on all the flaws, even the Yea Forumstendodrones will realize how flawed the game is.

Dark Souls is not Open World.

I doubt it. It's going to be a Majora's Mask situation where the sequel switches some stuff up and people either love it or hate it, but BotW gets canonized into a classic for the ages.

Yet still the world is huge and quite beautiful. Add in some god tier travelsal mechanics that drink from m64 phylosophy of "traversal options must be fluid, varied and fun" and you have a modern classic.

Disqualifying BotW's importance because of its very shallow shortcomings is the sign of a pleb. What it adds to the table is fundamental to Open world game design since it released, and every similar open world game that doesn't borrow ideas directly from it it's going to feel outdated.

>multiple routes and sequence breaking is the 101 of open world design
Does this mean Super Mario Bros is open world? Some levels have multiple routes and you can sequence break with the warp pipes.

i think the reason the game is such a big deal in our time is that Nintendo let go of its fear of the unknown, and went balls-to-the-wall in reinventing what was becoming an incredibly stagnant game formula. i wouldnt say so much this game revolutionized gaming as a whole, but it has given Nintendo lovers a sense of hope and excitement for what can come in the future.

in other words, this game was a huge moment for nintendo, even if not necessarily for gaming in general

It's the perfect facade, in a positive way.
Nearly everything is very intriguing from the very get go.
And the great Plateau is a stroke of genius that even other developer praise.
The start is slightly mysterious, you first view of the map is a picturesque view that
accentuates distinct landmarks. The weapon and crafting system feign more depth than
they actually have in the end. The lay of the land is structured to reward you on your way
back with shrines that were just hidden on your first trip through it.
Smaller points of interest like Koroks and enemy camps are just barely enough to fulfill the
discover, solve, reward cycle which, by design, decrease organically in relevance over time.
In later stages you might skip an enemy camp or continue flying over a Korok, because you
already have enough inventory.
It does have weaknesses though, especially in visual variety of the dungeons and shrines.
The puzzles are mostly adequate leaning on the slightly easy side, but are not very visually
distinct from one another. A problem that the DLC with the Sword Trials somewhat solved.
Even if we see the Divine Beasts with their pre-Quests as a package they are still somewhat
weak as dungeons go. By structure they are very limited in space and while the gimmicks are
good and fun they somehow feel underutilized even though you need them for nearly every
pedestal, which is weird.

While this facade holds the game is unbelievably engaging and fun. I cannot stress enough
what a good feeling the Great Plateau had. When I thought back on my first moments in
BotW I got nostalgia from a month ago. The facade slowly crumbles though at
approx. 2 of 4 Beasts the drive of completing the game, collecting and fighting takes over
the sense of wonder. The last dungeon as Hyrule castle is a very welcome little high point at
the end though. Culminating in a Boss Battle that left me with a feeling like MGS V at the end.

But it seems that unlike MGS we will get our "Chapter 3".

>a storyline that encourages the player to pursue the secrets of the world and piece together what happened in the past
This post is biased as fuck but this is the biggest bullshit I have ever heard being said about this game.

BOTW would be a much better game if the tutorial section straight up didn't exist, precisely because of how bad the story is and how it actively shreds 80% of the drive to explore right out the gate. The King of Hyrule info dumps the entire mystery of the ruined Hyrule you have to spend most of the game exploring in the first 2 hours of the game, and that one decision fucks up so much of what they were going for that it's a little ridiculous.

Before getting off the plateau you know exactly what happened, you know exactly what the ruined machines are, you know exactly what the threat is, what that shadowy thing flying in the sky is, and on the off chance you had any uncertainty left over after that, Zelda's voice ringing in your ears or Impa's secondary info dump one fucking step later in the main questline will clear that up whether you want it to or not, and paradoxically you HAVE to listen to Impa spoil the rest of your backstory if you want to be able to do the photo quests, which at that point essentially do nothing but add extra fluff to that info dump. Link may as well have not had lost his memory in the first place given what the narrative and the world did with it.

It was not mediocre but I do agree that if BOTW2 fixes most of BOTW's major flaws like the lack of unique content people will quickly turn on BOTW as if it was some kind of disappointment. People who said the game was a perfect masterpiece at its release will say it was a 7/10 at best in order to cover their asses.

To a degree it would be with the warp pipes though you can't walk out of levels the other way, you're practically on rails in that game.

Why don't you address my point user ? Its almost like you were speaking of a game you never played before and trying to argue something that is not true

If you're at a point where you're willing to say Super Mario Bros is open world "to a degree", then you've entirely lost sight of what open world is supposed to mean.

Man Dark Souls is also a great game, but their worlds, while having some light overlap, are great for different reasons.

BotW was a disappointment though. Godlike physics engine and open world design meanwhile pretty much everything else about the game is trash. It's wasted potential and people just ignore the major flaws while looking at the pros. Once people play the sequel they'll realize just how flawed BotW is.

Yeah, stacking boxes on top of each other and hitting things with switches is so complex. The thing that was clever about Zelda dungeon design (and most good game design really) is that created these gimmicks and then tried to do a good amount of what could be done with that gimmick, before they just moved to the next toy. If I ever have trouble on a puzzle in BotW it’s because, after walking around the big empty map for so long, I had forgotten one of my tools even existed, or maybe because there’s something you can do that only a stupid person would think of trying, like, for example, smacking a barrel against a switch normally activated by a laser

“traversal options must be fluid, varied, and fun”

yeah, that. getting to the very core of the gameplay- is it fun to be Link? its so easy to overlook that if youre only thinking about the world itself.

Alright dickhead, since you don't know what this means, let's give you a better example, even using one of the maps provided in this thread. The amount of entrances to the darkroot forest area, assuming I'm not forgetting one or two others, is three distinct passages. Whereas with the Zora domain area I've chosen, you can enter via, I dunno, the main path, or maybe from the north, or east, or south or generally any fucking direction because it's an OPEN world game.

Attached: maps.png (1256x1680, 1.09M)

It's still open world though, BotW main difference from Dark Souls is that it's a sandbox game.

Attached: 1545850945720.jpg (1200x849, 635K)

I like the story. The story isn't backstory, the story is getting to Zora's Domain and finding out that everyone still remembers you in various shades of relief, anger, and melancholy. There's a lot of stage-setting, but I still found helping out the individual towns and putting the Champions' spirits to rest to be a good plot. Except for the Rito village.

That's like saying Metroid is an open world game.

You're expecting too much from souls fanboys that have too much blood in their dicks from the game to be able to think of anything other than "muh GIT GUD game is best game".

You are genuinely retarded, you're stuck on your own definition of what an open world game is instead of facing the facts that it's at best just a non-linear game formula

>The King of Hyrule info dumps the entire mystery of the ruined Hyrule

They had to do that because Nintendo doesn't know what the player will do. If the player just decides to run bare-assed naked to the castle right away, they still have enough of the story under their belt to achieve some kind of thematic closure.

the storyline pissed me off but kind of for the opposite reason.

the fact that ganon was clever enough to hijack all the Guardians and beasts and turn them against hyrule made me anticipate ganon to be this genius mastermind villain that had a sharp wit and taunting dialogue.

and then you see him, and hes a disheveled spider boy. and then hes a pig.

and then its over.

i was legitimately angry when the credits finished.

It actually had the best puzzles in the series though. The exploration and puzzles were fantastic in BOTW. Problem is that I felt like I had seen everything the game had to offer like 20 hours in. If you don't like the shrines or exploring for the sake of exploring BOTW doesn't have much to offer beyond that. But those first 20 hours are so good that I find it hard to call it a true disappointment. It was a cool experiment in game design that paid off and now were going to get a fully fleshed out sequel that will hopefully reach BOTW's true potential. If BOTW's formula died with BOTW, then it would be a true disappointment. Because even people like yourself who dislike the game can see that BOTW is the template for a much better game.

I think they chose to render Ganon a mindless beast because otherwise it didn't make sense for him to be so passive and just sit around waiting for Link to come deal with him. Even taking Zelda's seal into account, he should be able to exert some influence on the world if he had a mind to do it with. How they address that in the sequel will be interesting.

sure, you know the story of why the world is the way it is when impa and king hyrule tell you, but it doesn't tell you much about Link's story, or Zelda's story, or any of the Champions' stories - and it still leaves a lot of specifics out. Through exploration you see lots of ruined towns, lots of ruins of past ages, and you explore the backstories of the primary characters through memories and interactions with npcs. you also get to explore the current stories of each major settlement and form connections there.

i'm not a fan of info-dumping as a narrative choice, but the player deserves to have some idea of the world as it stands in current time, so that the history of the world and the specifics of how it came to be that way are more compelling.

yeah, like i understand ultimately why he was more monstrous and crude, and i’ll even admit having an evil seeping “force” of evil over just a humanoid perpetrator of evil fits the aesthetic of the game much better.

it still just broke my heart to never see this iteration of ganon taunt link in the same way ganon has so many other times. especially with how fleshed out zelda’s character was; it wouldve been great to have an equally fleshed out ganondorf along with her.

but yeah, we’ll see if they play around with this in the sequel.

>Listen the 3 hour long review by Arlo, because i need something to listen too when grindin.
>Flat out admits that even if a game does a certain mechanic better than when its in Zelda, he'll prefer it in Zelda anyway because ITS ZELDA.

BotW was good, but it wasted too much potential mechanics and the like to be a 10/10

He's confusing the idea of having multiple(but limited) options to progress with open world design. Like others have pointed out, souls games have a structured area design that you must follow in some way. It's completely different from a game like BotW where you can complete challenges in numerous different ways, and the map design doesn't restrict you to exploring or advancing in any way.

Yes, you can get to areas in souls games that are later in the progression, but that doesn't mean it's open world, it's just somewhat open-ended.

Remember when sandbox meant games like minecraft? You know, where the term "sandbox" made sense.

Arlo has trouble explaining why so he just says "CUZ IT'S ZELDA", what he means is that, going by how other games do the open world formula, even if they had the same mechanics as Zelda because what makes BOTW great is not one, but many reasons and thus a single mechanic done better in another game is not enough to top his preference for BOTW

>Even taking Zelda's seal into account, he should be able to exert some influence on the world
He has his influence on the world as a beast already with the blood moons. This isn't really a compelling excuse whatsoever but yeah I do want to know how BOTW2 is planning on handling Ganon having a working brain, if they even go in that direction.

>but the player deserves to have some idea of the world as it stands in current time
Then give the player "some" idea, do it with vague images or words that pop into the head of this guy that by the way is supposed to have amnesia, going with the full rundown, followed by ANOTHER full rundown was a huge mistake. All that the game has left for you at that point is "hey did you know that this champion didn't like Link very much?" And on top of that, when you come across a ruined settlement, there's never a point where you're asking yourself "what could've happened here", because you know exactly what happened, the same thing that happened everywhere else, and you didn't really come to that conclusion on your own, the game did it for you by throwing it in your face when you had barely even started it.

Zelda's voice is another thing. Using that blood moon example, imagine how much better the first blood moon would've been if she kept her mouth shut for the whole thing. You aren't missing out on any of the details, the whole thing is spooky as fuck when it first kicks in because you're just exploring outside one moment and when the particle effects kick in you have no idea what the hell is going on, then when the cutscene happens you see the enemies respawning, you have Ganon freaking out and you have a great "oh fuck" moment that Zelda has to butt in on. And the worst thing about it is how you have dedicated NPCs in the world that you can talk to about the blood moon, you should be hearing all of that from THEM, after finding them, in the world. There's two design philosophies at odds here.

>He has his influence on the world as a beast already with the blood moons.
Yeah, that's what I mean. If even beast Ganon was able to influence the world, then an intelligent Ganondorf would probably be doing even more, which would prompt a more immediate response from Link.

Shrines are the most horrid level design I have ever seen in my life. Anyone who says BotW has good level design is an unbelievable fanboy.

It was a Breath of Fresh Air.

It has the most boring and bland looking world of any open world game ever made. The game basically feels like a shrine and korok scavenger hunt. It is not a good open world game.

>The way the game is designed around the notion that "if you think this should work, it probably will" is extraordinarily satisfying.
>try to burn wooden bokoblin camps
>doesnt work
go fuck yourself. the interaction in this game is overrated garbage

it is not? you literally never hear about it outside switch damage control threads, as mich it may make you seethe, the golden standard of open world rpg is still skyrim, even in japan

I’ve been saying this since release but I have no clue how anyone thinks the dungeons in traditional 3D Zelda were better designed than botw. It blows my mind.

>once it releases the blinds will be off
>after the honeymoon period ends everyone will realize
>once the sequel releases people will finally see

Lmao

>then an intelligent Ganondorf would probably be doing even more
But would he really? Do we really have anything to base that off of? Zelda's seal in this game isn't any less vague than any seal in any of the other games, and honestly the Blood Moon itself isn't on a much lower level than what a more-or-less unrestrained dorf was doing in Wind Waker.

when fans say "getting to somewhere in the distance is a game in itself" or "you have to figure out where to go and interact with the world to do it", I always feel like they are exaggerating beyond belief. Getting from A to B in this game is extremely simple and not even that fun. There is really nothing that amazing about seeing a tower in the distance and getting to it, most of the time i just ran in that direction and glided/climbed when convenient. I don't understand why BotW fans act like navigation in this game is so complex or interesting

>see that mountain?
>you can ACTUALLY climb it

>most of the time i just ran in that direction and glided/climbed when convenient. I don't understand why BotW fans act like navigation in this game is so complex or interesting

Because you’re fucking boring. You held forward and wondered why it wasn’t interesting

By the literal definition, yes, Dark Souls 1 is open world.
Of course, the vast majority of people (morons) don't use the term to refer "game worlds you can explore freely", but more to talk about "games with huge worlds", in which case DS wouldn't apply.

Attached: thwehtwerhjertyj.jpg (720x575, 86K)

Because there is no point B. Most of the time you're not trying to get somewhere in particular, you just wander around with interesting things popping up on the horizon and it's fucking great because you still make progress and see unique content, without a minimap or POIs ruining everything.

You missed the entire point of this whole argument. You don't know what makes for an open world game and choose to ignore when presented with the definition of it
You are stuck in the "only I am right" bubble because you are afraid of being wrong, which you are.

playing the game myself the most thought that ever went into my exploration was
>see tower
>try to climb the tower and fail because stamina is too low
>ok how do I get to the top of this tower when my stamina bar is this low
>ok there's another cliff behind this I should be able to glide from the top of it lets try to get up that first
>try to climb the cliff and fail because stamina is too low
>ok now how do I get up this cliff with stamina this low
>ok there's another outcropping over here maybe I can climb that and get to the top of the cliff from there
>repeat until climbing something successfully
>finally get to the top of the tower
>almost an hour has gone by
>I feel like I should've just beelined for the shrines and not bothered with exploring the rest of this to increase the stamina bar so I wouldn't have wasted so much fucking time doing this

Two years on and people still rave about BotW.

youtu.be/cb-20dDjOPQ

Too Long Didn't Watch; a nigger tried to play BotW a couple of times over the past two years, didn't like it. Then on 3rd attempt he finally "got" it.

Epic bait

>By the literal definition, yes, Dark Souls 1 is open world.
You're a fucking retard.

This. I actually agreed withva lot of the complaints Yea Forums had about the game when I played through some of it on normal. Mastermode actually forced me to realize what this game was about.

This guy has regular sex with his loving wife, has procreated, and derives happiness from the simple pleasure of playing video games. What are you doing with your life, fucko?

based

Literally just bought BOTW a few days ago. Fantastic so far.
>Following main quest
>Ignore it for a few minutes to go check out something that caught my eye
>Accidentally stray too close to guardians and spend the next half hour ducking and dodging homing lasers
>Fast forward
>Exploring the mountains
>Zoom down into a canyon grassland and see a giant fucking horse
>Go down there and tame it
>Turns out there's a guy who wanted you to find it for a quest and as you talk to him he thanks you for bringing the horse to him already
They somehow understand open world design better than developers that have been doing it for near two decades.

most fuckable Link
no homo tho

I think this post embodies the hype behind BOTW pretty well. They see a small detail that open ended games have been doing for years that Nintendo was just discovering for the first time and consider it a new idea because none of the games they grew up on ever did it.

>Small detail that open ended games have been doing for years
Like Grand theft au- oh wait, GTA doesn't do any of that. Nigger the reason why it stands out is because in every other open world game that horse wouldn't have appeared without me having to talk to the guy first. In other open world games I need to unlock that area first by doing the main quest. In BOTW it's just there, waiting for you to interact.

No retard. Its because we've other open world games we can see how much better BotW is compared. BotW made most other open world games seem boring, stale and old fashioned overnight. Even the open world games released since still can't compete because they were all in development for years using the same old archaic game design mindset.

Agree 100%. "Show, don't tell" is almost always the better choice for narrative. It would have been so much better if the desire to explore the world was driven not just by wanting to see what's over the next ridge, but also by wanting to piece together the story of Hyrule's destruction. If they had taken this route, had actual side content, and real dungeons, then the game would have been 10/10. Hopefully BOTW2 will learn from some of these mistakes but the story in Zelda is always ass so I doubt we'll see much improvement there. Oh well.

>people actually believe this

>It would have been so much better if the desire to explore the world was driven not just by wanting to see what's over the next ridge, but also by wanting to piece together the story of Hyrule's destruction.

The game literally DOES with the memory side quest. You have to explore to find Link's lost memories which flesh out the story of what happened.

don't post my wife while baiting!

Not really they just show stuff from links boring perspective

A twink main character with lots of costumes + a nice art style that allows for faster creation of content translating into a fuller game that looks comfy.

Attached: cowboy.jpg (225x225, 18K)

>Good game with alot of creative game design? Yes.
>Milestone in videogame history?
Lol No. I like the game alot but there's alot of glaring issues and I really dont get alot of the endless dicksucking it gets. It's fine but there was never a point where the game blew my mind or anything.

???????

>some of the worst dungeon design among the entire franchise

nigger

It's the modern OoT: it takes the best ideas from a litany of other games and arranges them in the manner most pallettable to the mass audience. One thing's for sure, all these freakout Twitter memes over the teaser make it clear this game struck a chord with the Skyrim/Fallout crowd despite elitist claims it stands on its own.

>He says while he unironically attacks a video game on an online anonymous website.

Attached: oishii.jpg (369x704, 51K)

It's not yall just wont let this shit go.

Attached: giphy-2.gif (500x281, 99K)

Because it bringed back adventure instead of shitty dungeons for autists.

brought
need to sleep

that mad huh? you know its just a video game right?

>First open world game to not tell you where shit is and where to go.
that was a thing when Nintendo was making game&watch you fucking aspie zoomer

You must not play many games.

Thats not true at all. The mechanics are good, its the visuals that are lacking.