I’m sure whatever comes after Tears of the Kingdom will be great, but Aonuma’s stance on the future of the Zelda series is disappointing.If you like what I d…
I’m sure whatever comes after Tears of the Kingdom will be great, but Aonuma’s stance on the future of the Zelda series is disappointing.If you like what I d…
I’m inclined to trust the man who has overseen two masterpieces back-to-back in botw and totk.
Plus calling it a linear-vs-openworld is a bit weird considering that neither were old Zelda games fully linear, nor are the two newest games fully open. In a lot of ways, the newer games just removed the walls that previously blocked your sight of other parts of the world. You can see what is there, and in a lot of ways you can go there, but plenty parts are also indirectly locked off due to needing specific armor or quests. Just like in older games you could wander around but might eventually hit walls requiring items.
Id say that wall is a pretty soft wall though. And to Arlos point, the building mechanic allows you to cheese through a lot of it.
If Arlo wanted people to be less salty about his video, he should have not made that dumb thumbnail. I get its for the clicks and the youtube alg. Hes not even saying either one is better than the other in the video. If anything hes saying the Zelda team should find a balance.
SS was primarily linear and Breath/Tear was were primary open ended. Finding a middle ground is definitely doable and that’s all that Arlo is saying.
Another thing I’m not seeing people mention is that the world in previous zeldas were a puzzle in and of themselves. You had dungeons, but you also had towns and the overworld puzzles that gave you better items or access to new areas. The new zelda games only have the shrines (which are usually small one room puzzles).
I would far from call the new zeldas masterpieces, but I think my main worry is that he seems like he might be incapable of breaking the formula.
I’m fully expecting the next game to be breath of the wild 3, with a new gimmick but basically the same. And for a series as varied as the zelda series that is fairly sad.
I don’t know what to say to someone who doesn’t feel like totk was enough of an innovation but to each their own.
I would say look at the difference between LttP, OoT, wind waker, twilight princess, skyward sword, and botw. Then look at the difference between botw and totk.
The former has every game feeling like a unique thing, I grew up being excited for this new world. Totk isn’t that.
I know people love this game, yourself included. But keeping perspective is important too, or else you end up with Nintendoa arogant side where they get stuck making the same core experience over and over. You want nintendos interesting new experiences side.
I’d day TotK is to BotW what MM was to OoT.
Lots of the same assets and gameplay/animations, completely different feel.
That’s fair, but again these people have proven they know what they’re doing. Criticising this dev team after a misstep I can get, criticising them in the light of the two games they’ve just delivered just seems like talking for the sake of talking. I grew up with MM being a direct sequel to OoT, I’m fine with building on an already great game. I doubt they’ll let the series stagnate.
I’m worried, given statements they have made, that they will. I fully expect that their next game will be botw 3, same map, new coat of paint for switch 2.
It’s not worth complaining about this until it actually happens, of course, I’m just actively worried that we’ve lost something
Didn’t they state that their next game would not be a totk sequel?