The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild

Karl_ wrote:It means "Game of the Generation". It's a variant on GOTY / Game of the Year.

Thanks Karl. In that case, yes it's a fitting title. The amount of freedom this game offers, the ease at which we can lose hours of our time just kicking back in one small portion of the game, the fact that I still haven't discovered everything there is to discover in it, yes this is quite possibly the GOTG. It's the most realized world in gaming. Excited for the sequel!

deathofcows wrote:7) It's lonelier and emptier in a more profound way. I wonder if this musicality also previously gave environments a sense of inhabitation, or at least personality, that has been removed in BotW in a way that sometimes makes it feel cold to me. A little lonely. (I think it's why the Deku-tree area is a favorite of mine, as it feels most like a classic Zelda environment permeated by an 'ever-mood' of music and walled off by the Lost Woods). And maybe it's because the game is more 'realisitc', in the sense of having an indifferent land-mass that isn't built in obviously game-ic shapes and form. Maybe its the more subtle relationship between player/gameplay and environment (compared with the almost Mario-like clockwork of Skyward Sword) that makes me feel a little decentered, and the world feel a little more barren.

8) Maybe the loneliness is also just from the lack of a companion.

The loneliness is honestly one of my favourite parts of the game; when you put it in tandem with the level of immersion the game provides (at least for me), just quietly exploring the overworld becomes a deeply melancholic experience. The feeling I get from BotW is something I've never had from any other game or work of media in general.

Karl_ wrote:You guys are such dicks sometimes

AnOpenCasket wrote:What's GOTG?

It means "Game of the Generation". It's a variant on GOTY / Game of the Year.

Yeah sorry AOC that really want very helpful was it

Ad7 wrote:

Karl_ wrote:You guys are such dicks sometimes

AnOpenCasket wrote:What's GOTG?

It means "Game of the Generation". It's a variant on GOTY / Game of the Year.

Yeah sorry AOC that really want very helpful was it

It helped by making me smile

Another satisfied customer.

Captain Kinopio wrote:Interesting view on it.

However climbing and the freedom that enabled was the single best thing implemented in BOTW. That’s about as near enough an objective fact you will get when it comes to opinions on gaming, countless reviews and commentators have called it out as such. I cannot imagine what a staggering step backwards it would be to take it out of the game.

I think there’s potentially an argument for obstacles geographic, environmental and physical becoming ultimately more or less meaningless as you progress through the game and a sequel needing to improve on that. How you do that with the go anywhere do anything design of the game that was so brilliant, I’ll leave to the genius design team. I’ve seen it said a few times that the plateau is the best part of the game because it’s where the environment is it’s most puzzle like in how you have to adapt to it. From the chopping trees to cross chasms, using girders to create bridges, natural obstacles for stealth approaches and the myriad of ways to tackle the mountain. It’s utterly superb. In the broader world it’s still there but on a diminishing returns basis. I’d love to see late game stuff like it, maybe building boats to cross lakes or oceans and some hardcore environments like Hebra where you can’t just pop on a warm coat and nullify any effect.

Climbing has to stay almost as is though, potentially tweaked so it’s less easily cheesed. Would love to see some proper hardcore climbing challenges too. Like the far south east cliff face, but where you had to scale it in some hardcore fashion to progress in the game. Camping half way up, killing birds to boost energy, surviving the elements as you scaled it. That would be strawberry floating brilliant.

Yeah, the great plateau is definitely a highlight. Not only because you are more limited in powers and so have to use your skills/resources more meaningfully (and also not only because it looks like a classic Zelda concept art come to life) but also because the 'story' of how you accomplish things is novel and new.

Matt Thorson of Celeste fame has a great talk from GDC in which he discusses the design of Celeste:



In it he describes each level (by which he means each screen/segment) as a 'story' (i.e. a story of traversing space), and his talk gives some insight into how the team used the limited mechanics to make each screen meaningfully different and interesting.

In classic 3D-Zelda the world was divided into tightly designed areas that were all navigated and accomplished differently - they all have their own unique 'story'. In BotW the environments and weather and so on all change. But after a while the 'story' of the environment - how you interact with and engage with each area - starts repeating and flattening into the run-climb-jump-glide rhythm without specificity of old-school 3D-Zelda.

I actually wonder if the game is no longer a platform game in the way that 3D-Zelda used to be. They were limited in their move-set compared to a Mario (which probably actually added a grounded, weighty rhythm to its movement better suited to the series) but were still designed around the binaries of flat-tops and sheer walls: literal platforms compared with a the organic, undulating BotW.

If anything the lack of a jump button exaggerated its platforming nature - every single had that sudden, crisp, edge-of-the-platform exaggerated leap.

I think this makes BotW more of a 'landscape' game not just in terms of how you can see the landscape rolling into the distance, with all its vistas of rock ripples and grassy meadows or whatever. But because the world is one you also interact with, in a way that changes the units of traversal: where a mile-of-3D can be surfed-down or glided over en route to the next grain of interest. Compared with OG 3D-Zelda where there were usually considerations every few meters.

It's not just that you can see whole landscapes, but that your engagement with the world is more macro, slightly aloof and distant - and less fixed by more immediate things.

As always I'm not saying it's worse, just that I think there's more differentiating the texture and feel of this Zelda than just a linear expansion of capabilities and freedom.

VlaSoul wrote:

deathofcows wrote:7) It's lonelier and emptier in a more profound way. I wonder if this musicality also previously gave environments a sense of inhabitation, or at least personality, that has been removed in BotW in a way that sometimes makes it feel cold to me. A little lonely. (I think it's why the Deku-tree area is a favorite of mine, as it feels most like a classic Zelda environment permeated by an 'ever-mood' of music and walled off by the Lost Woods). And maybe it's because the game is more 'realisitc', in the sense of having an indifferent land-mass that isn't built in obviously game-ic shapes and form. Maybe its the more subtle relationship between player/gameplay and environment (compared with the almost Mario-like clockwork of Skyward Sword) that makes me feel a little decentered, and the world feel a little more barren.

8) Maybe the loneliness is also just from the lack of a companion.

The loneliness is honestly one of my favourite parts of the game; when you put it in tandem with the level of immersion the game provides (at least for me), just quietly exploring the overworld becomes a deeply melancholic experience. The feeling I get from BotW is something I've never had from any other game or work of media in general.

I know what you mean, and perhaps it's just that the loneliness feels a little like a coldness/sparseness compared to what I'm used to in Zelda.

I was wondering yesterday whether the loneliness wasn't just from the size of the world (and in general the way you engage with it, like the Magnesis/Stasis powers being things you do to objects from a distance instead of the drone-float closeness of say the beetle in Skyward Sword etc.) and the way it feels like suddenly being in a dual-carriage-way Zelda (making Link feel smaller).

But I was wondering whether the more ambient, intermittent music and environmental sounds gave Link less significance. Made it feel (perhaps more realistically) like a character exploring a natural landmass that was indifferent to his adventure - compared with the near-constant music of say Termina Field or OoT's Hyrule field giving a sense of significance and import and centrality to everything you are doing: This Is Where The Adventure Is, This Is Where Things Are Happening! Your Quest is the bubble of interest that roams this world and makes it happen! And so on.

As opposed to BotW sandbox approach of: Hey go explore! Knock yourself out!

Perhaps my next Case-Study will be playing the game whilst listening to an Overworld theme.

Perhaps (definitely) I'm very obsessed with the differences in this Zelda - Apologies all!

OrangeRKN wrote:Lots of interesting points but just to respond to this one:

deathofcows wrote:I actually tried BotW using only L-Trigger camera and I swear it changed things, and my focus and the feel!

It might be interesting for you to try out the VR mode. I didn't read particularly great things about it, but as a study of changing the experience I reckon it would be interesting!

Once I've solved my OG 3D -> BotW difference obsession, I'll try VR and probably start all over again

deathofcows wrote:I think this makes BotW more of a 'landscape' game not just in terms of how you can see the landscape rolling into the distance, with all its vistas of rock ripples and grassy meadows or whatever. But because the world is one you also interact with, in a way that changes the units of traversal: where a mile-of-3D can be surfed-down or glided over en route to the next grain of interest. Compared with OG 3D-Zelda where there were usually considerations every few meters.

I’m not sure what you’re saying here. I certainly don’t agree that BotW’s points of interest are further apart than previous 3D Zeldas

Captain Kinopio wrote:I certainly don’t agree that BotW’s points of interest are further apart than previous 3D Zeldas

Really? Because they definitely are - that isn't up for debate, surely? Compare the amount of time it takes to get from, let's say, Kakariko Village to Zora's Domain. No horses, no warping. It's a quicker journey in OOT than in BotW, because you're traversing a much shorter distance.

Captain Kinopio wrote:

deathofcows wrote:I think this makes BotW more of a 'landscape' game not just in terms of how you can see the landscape rolling into the distance, with all its vistas of rock ripples and grassy meadows or whatever. But because the world is one you also interact with, in a way that changes the units of traversal: where a mile-of-3D can be surfed-down or glided over en route to the next grain of interest. Compared with OG 3D-Zelda where there were usually considerations every few meters.

I’m not sure what you’re saying here. I certainly don’t agree that BotW’s points of interest are further apart than previous 3D Zeldas

I mean that in BotW the traversal has long sweeps of climbing/gliding/surfing between a distant shrine or a looming hill-top or stable on the horizon or whatever. Which is fine! But it's less punctuated by the kind of detailed (in gameplay, not graphics) local navigation of Kokiri Forest, say, in which everyone can remember the three jump platforms across the water en route to the shop, or the narrow bridge that hangs above.

The latter feels more distinct, and with a bigger focus on the immediate area, than in BotW where the gamefeel is more a constant roaming of the camera to spy out distant landmarks then smoothly work your way towards them (whilst constantly scanning around for others peaks and troughs to unveil). I wonder if the climbing also acts as a 'buffer' that gives each jump and so on a little less gravity and importance than in old Zelda.

OG 3D-Zelda (with its small environments, increased platforming and more fixed camera) is like one of those Mindfulness exercises with its close focus - as opposed to the more distant (perhaps more detached) landscape-Zelda of BotW.

Even in WW the long swathes of sea travel were punctuated by silos of tightly designed 3D-space.

And in SS it was all tailored spaces like levels, without much free-form room to roam at all.

As always I don't think my thoughts are definitive - just the working-out!

I should probably just write an article or something.

THE ONLY TRUE GAMER wrote:

Captain Kinopio wrote:I certainly don’t agree that BotW’s points of interest are further apart than previous 3D Zeldas

Really? Because they definitely are - that isn't up for debate, surely? Compare the amount of time it takes to get from, let's say, Kakariko Village to Zora's Domain. No horses, no warping. It's a quicker journey in OOT than in BotW, because you're traversing a much shorter distance.

Obviously the distance is greater but not the amount of things to do which is what I think doc was getting at.

Travel from Kakariko Village to Zoras Domain in OOT and what is there to do? A few underground holes, the seed guy, Cuccoos, Frogs and the platforming up the chasm. It's not a lot. The same journey in BOTW you'll come across dozens of korok seeds, a few shrines, a stable with side quests (depending on your route), a ruined village, some mini-bosses, a tower and a lot more environmental interaction. I'm sure I'm forgetting stuff too.

Comparing Kokiri Forest with a slice of the open world isn't a fair comparison (unless you're comparing it to the Great Plateau) as it's clearly a more intricately designed area with more focus on things to do. Even so I'd say you could probably take plenty of equivalent sized areas of BOTW's overworld and find more to do than there is in Kokiri Forest.

THE ONLY TRUE GAMER wrote:

Captain Kinopio wrote:I certainly don’t agree that BotW’s points of interest are further apart than previous 3D Zeldas

Really? Because they definitely are - that isn't up for debate, surely? Compare the amount of time it takes to get from, let's say, Kakariko Village to Zora's Domain. No horses, no warping. It's a quicker journey in OOT than in BotW, because you're traversing a much shorter distance.

I think there is more nuance than that (and I think a comparison is definitely interesting).

The physical space between locations in BOTW is unquestionably larger, but Ocarina feels bigger, because of how it is bordered and boxed. The unexplorable becomes a whole world for the imagination. The game even makes use of it.

What's Kakariko closer to - Castle Town or Death Mountain? In real physical distance I think the answer might actually be Castle Town, but that's surprising until you plot it out because Kakariko certainly feels like a village in the shadow of Death Mountain rather than a suburb of the capital. How does the game pull off that trick? A few ways I think. Hyrule Field buffers Castle Town from Kakariko, with two transitions between them, even if the distance across the field is so short. Between Kakariko and Death Mountain is a single gate. The story progression also places Kakariko and Death Mountain together in visitation, so they become associated through the flow of the narrative. Finally the individual boxed areas of Ocarina aren't quite consistent. From Castle Town, Death Mountain is only visible behind the Temple of Time - and it looks somewhat distant. Certainly more distant than it would be if the areas were combined and rendered together. In contrast Death Mountain dominates the skybox of Kakariko Village.

Kokiri Forest is another example I've already touched upon. In BOTW the forest is physically more separate from other locations, yet it appears smaller and more connected, even with the attempts to artificially detach the forest from the rest of the world. That's because in Ocarina the part you can explore feels like only a small, forgotten corner of a much larger (and unknowable) forest. Again that's done through a combination of narrative, transitions, and its apparent rather than actual position.

Not being a single open world, Ocarina isn't restricted by exact geography. Breath of the Wild is necessarily bound to it. So they're both bigger than each other in different ways, if you ask me!

The main thing I've taken from that is to never ask OR seemingly simple questions.

Started the last dlc properly. This game is so wonderful and i can’t wait to replay it. I hope we see higher resolution updates on the switch plus.

Sandy wrote:The main thing I've taken from that is to never ask OR seemingly simple questions.

That's what I told the police

Oh strawberry float off BOTW, it’s 2019 now, how are you still surprising us

But seriously, how wasn’t that picked up before?!

Wow! Champions dlc seems more of the same and am a little fed up of the trials. I hope the sequel does away with this mini levels, because they just aren’t zelda. I want big open world levels.

Mystical Ninja Starring Danmon wrote:

I think that’s a stretch