What's your opinion on OoT? Imo OoT is my most favourite Zelda game but the other 3D Zelda titles are easily comparable to OoT. Also, the lore of the Zelda series is pretty interesting too.
Yep, it's just bad that you only get the green tunic when completing all shrines. I'd like it more if you got it after completing all 4 divine beasts.
Post automatically merged:
Yep, it's just bad that you only get the green tunic when completing all shrines. I'd like it more if you got it after completing all 4 divine beasts.
After seeing the Dark Crystal and its prequel Age of Resistance, I would love to see a villain or antagonist group similar to the Skekis, especially similar to the Emperor, the Chamberlain, the Garthim-Master/General, and the Hunter. With birdlike appearance(s) and more personality details and quirks than most Zelda villains, while remaining very dangerous.
I sometime still play Breath of the Wild but when I'm always exploring something, I'm always questioning this kind of decision by Nintendo:
https://www.zeldadungeon.net/breath...ookshot-wasnt-included-in-breath-of-the-wild/
I am STILL MAD that Nintendo gave this kind of bullshit reason to not implement the hookshot into the game! Apparently the double hookshot would destroy the climbing mechanics but this is big cap and I will explain why: They just did some testing and they did not even TRY to look for different solutions for the hit mark. If the use of the (double) hookshot was too op, they can always nerf it by making it drain the stamina. Or making conditions of the whole hit mark that you can only pull on something which the hookshot can GRAB on. I mean, you can't also just grab on any hill in Ocarina of Time, Wind Waker, Twilight Princess or Skyward Sword - so where's the need to make everything into an object to collide with the hookshot? I just don't get it man.
On the map, there are plenty of mountains and on several mountains, there can be easily made some small spots being the hit mark of the hookshot, ie by programming the moss or the flowers and plants as collisions for the hookshot. And everything which is made of stone or have no conditions for the grab point are not capable to be pulled on.
They wanna tell me they couldn't do that? And they couldn't make certain spots for the hookshot to nerf its function? So after some testing, they thought "Nah, screw that"?
I mean, how does it even completely destroy the climbing mechanics? If it's about some hills, yes, it would make the whole climbing obsolete but did they ever test it on the large mountains on the map? Seriously, I'm climbing on the hills for SEVERAL MINUTES. And sometimes, weather conditions are important too since you ain't even capable of climbing if it rains. Would it not be efficient to have the hookshot which can actually support Link in climbing these gigantic mountains more flexible too?
I just don't get the reason why they had to CUT OFF entire UNIQUE ITEMS like the hookshot!
At last, "We were just going back to what we did before, and Breath of the Wild is all about doing new things." - if the new things are about cutting off important and unique items which could be easily fixed in development, then they clearly reached their goal, lol.
Also, that's kind of the consequence of giving ALL items to the player AT THE BEGINNING. Because of that, they cannot plan straightforward when it comes to implementing items on the later game if the player has everything anyway. Of course it would make it too easy - that's the fucking point of this game. Having the freedom to do whatever you like. So it's kinda ironic that they're cutting off lots of things which would make the freedom experience even greater. And if that is such an issue, why did they get rid of the item-progression in the first place?
There is a post in this Zelda forum which describes perfectly why removing the item-progression is an issue:
I can get that they want to keep the "open-air" formular of Open-World based Zelda games but how it is that efficient when they got rid of every remarkable gameplay aspect of the Zelda franchise as a whole? Where is the issue to make progression with items more efficient, even if you can only get certain items later on? "Go everywhere you like" is a concept which can be handled different - Elden Ring already demonstrated it. And yes, you needed certain items to progress through the whole world. Did it still affect the entire game's experience as a whole?
I seriously hope they learned from these mistakes and actually considered more conclusions to include traditional gameplay models as well.
https://www.zeldadungeon.net/breath...ookshot-wasnt-included-in-breath-of-the-wild/
I am STILL MAD that Nintendo gave this kind of bullshit reason to not implement the hookshot into the game! Apparently the double hookshot would destroy the climbing mechanics but this is big cap and I will explain why: They just did some testing and they did not even TRY to look for different solutions for the hit mark. If the use of the (double) hookshot was too op, they can always nerf it by making it drain the stamina. Or making conditions of the whole hit mark that you can only pull on something which the hookshot can GRAB on. I mean, you can't also just grab on any hill in Ocarina of Time, Wind Waker, Twilight Princess or Skyward Sword - so where's the need to make everything into an object to collide with the hookshot? I just don't get it man.
On the map, there are plenty of mountains and on several mountains, there can be easily made some small spots being the hit mark of the hookshot, ie by programming the moss or the flowers and plants as collisions for the hookshot. And everything which is made of stone or have no conditions for the grab point are not capable to be pulled on.
They wanna tell me they couldn't do that? And they couldn't make certain spots for the hookshot to nerf its function? So after some testing, they thought "Nah, screw that"?
I mean, how does it even completely destroy the climbing mechanics? If it's about some hills, yes, it would make the whole climbing obsolete but did they ever test it on the large mountains on the map? Seriously, I'm climbing on the hills for SEVERAL MINUTES. And sometimes, weather conditions are important too since you ain't even capable of climbing if it rains. Would it not be efficient to have the hookshot which can actually support Link in climbing these gigantic mountains more flexible too?
I just don't get the reason why they had to CUT OFF entire UNIQUE ITEMS like the hookshot!
At last, "We were just going back to what we did before, and Breath of the Wild is all about doing new things." - if the new things are about cutting off important and unique items which could be easily fixed in development, then they clearly reached their goal, lol.
Also, that's kind of the consequence of giving ALL items to the player AT THE BEGINNING. Because of that, they cannot plan straightforward when it comes to implementing items on the later game if the player has everything anyway. Of course it would make it too easy - that's the fucking point of this game. Having the freedom to do whatever you like. So it's kinda ironic that they're cutting off lots of things which would make the freedom experience even greater. And if that is such an issue, why did they get rid of the item-progression in the first place?
There is a post in this Zelda forum which describes perfectly why removing the item-progression is an issue:
I can get that they want to keep the "open-air" formular of Open-World based Zelda games but how it is that efficient when they got rid of every remarkable gameplay aspect of the Zelda franchise as a whole? Where is the issue to make progression with items more efficient, even if you can only get certain items later on? "Go everywhere you like" is a concept which can be handled different - Elden Ring already demonstrated it. And yes, you needed certain items to progress through the whole world. Did it still affect the entire game's experience as a whole?
I seriously hope they learned from these mistakes and actually considered more conclusions to include traditional gameplay models as well.
Eh maybe I'm cynical, but I usally look at justifications of not including game mechanics that would take a lot of effort by saying it was because of "the vision of the creators" as just pr speak.
I think if you as a big company say "yeah we didnt want to bother putting it in, too much effort" it would come over badly (just look at game freaks reputation😂).
But eh who knows, maybe it really did suck or something but who knows, I just hope BOTW2 comes out and I live enough to play it AND that it won't disapoint
I think if you as a big company say "yeah we didnt want to bother putting it in, too much effort" it would come over badly (just look at game freaks reputation😂).
But eh who knows, maybe it really did suck or something but who knows, I just hope BOTW2 comes out and I live enough to play it AND that it won't disapoint
I do believe there is a solid justification of not including such game mechanics into the game. I believe they were overwhelmed by the sheer scale of the game, developing the game engine and designing the map as well as assets. But they struggled the most when it comes to the game engine despite getting help from a team of Monoliftsoft. They even planned to make 10 dungeons - as the Divine Beasts - which were supposed to be like traditional but mobile dungeons with their own individual architecture.
I can understand their reasonings but it is still disappointing, knowing that BotW could be so much more. But at the end, there is the sequel and they finally have the experience of developing such huge games. I believe they will implement a lot of traditional Zelda elements as well whilst keeping the new formular of the open air concept. Dungeons and items will appear for sure - those were their ideas even when they already developed an open world Zelda game like that.
So it's not even like they got rid of the unique concepts of former Zelda games only because they wanted to try something new, it's the case that the duration of the development took them longer than expected. But having issues with the deadline is part of the Zelda game development ever since Wind Waker, hell, especially Wind Waker. The poor people only had time of 2 years to develop WW and they also had to cut lots of ideas, unfortunately. Yet, WW still came out as a very nice game.
Unfortunately, on BotW's case, I say it took them even harder because at the end, they even had to cut off multiple items and even solid dungeons. Yep, as I said, Divine Beasts were meant to be traditional dungeons but mobile but due to developing issues - I still think they didn't have the time to develop all of that within the deadline - they only managed to make 4 Divine Beasts very superficial and quite halfassed.
Here are some of the concept arts I talk about:
And again, the whole thing with the Divine Beasts isn't even made up, you can look it up here:
The issue was that it was very difficult to design these Divine Beasts. Also, compared to their current version, the older ones look much more individual with their design.
Oh, yep, of course they wouldn't openly admit it like that, at least not this soon. But look how many years it took for them to admit the flaws in their previous development about Wind Waker. It's basically the same here, if not even worse. @fakename
I can understand their reasonings but it is still disappointing, knowing that BotW could be so much more. But at the end, there is the sequel and they finally have the experience of developing such huge games. I believe they will implement a lot of traditional Zelda elements as well whilst keeping the new formular of the open air concept. Dungeons and items will appear for sure - those were their ideas even when they already developed an open world Zelda game like that.
So it's not even like they got rid of the unique concepts of former Zelda games only because they wanted to try something new, it's the case that the duration of the development took them longer than expected. But having issues with the deadline is part of the Zelda game development ever since Wind Waker, hell, especially Wind Waker. The poor people only had time of 2 years to develop WW and they also had to cut lots of ideas, unfortunately. Yet, WW still came out as a very nice game.
Unfortunately, on BotW's case, I say it took them even harder because at the end, they even had to cut off multiple items and even solid dungeons. Yep, as I said, Divine Beasts were meant to be traditional dungeons but mobile but due to developing issues - I still think they didn't have the time to develop all of that within the deadline - they only managed to make 4 Divine Beasts very superficial and quite halfassed.
Here are some of the concept arts I talk about:
And again, the whole thing with the Divine Beasts isn't even made up, you can look it up here:
The issue was that it was very difficult to design these Divine Beasts. Also, compared to their current version, the older ones look much more individual with their design.
Post automatically merged:
Oh, yep, of course they wouldn't openly admit it like that, at least not this soon. But look how many years it took for them to admit the flaws in their previous development about Wind Waker. It's basically the same here, if not even worse. @fakename
Last edited:
