If this was not a Zelda game would the reception be the same

Avatar image for barrettalong
#1 Edited by barrettalong (28 posts) -

So we finally have the big reveal of Zelda: Breath of the Wild and seemingly every games news outlet has lost their shit for this game. IGN had some coverage in which they were going wild over the game having a Jump button, like they repeated it over and over like Nintendo had done something so amazingly new that they couldn't believe it was happening.

I get it, Zelda is a beloved franchise and it has earned a spot in many gamers hearts. And thats is totally justified as the franchise has done some amazing things since it launched in 1986. However I just don't think this hype level makes sense with what has happened with this game up to this point.

I agree totally that it has a striking art style. The colours, animation and art style were awesome to watch (the pop in of textures is a little rough in the demo and this could change by launch but it is worth mentioning) but the game play is where I am having the hard time understanding the reaction.

The land mass was seemingly empty and void of any real character. I am not talking about towns or NPC as I know Nintendo has said they left them out for story reasons but rather things like enemies or distinct landmarks or any sense that the world is inhabited at all. Again it was very pretty too look at but in all the footage I have scene so far it just seemed empty.

Then there are the mechanics that everyone was going nuts for like a jump button for example. They kinda all seem like they had just been ripped form other games. Finding and crafting weapons that break down over time (which is almost never fun), climbing towers to reveal more of the map, having loot, hunting animals, cooking food, changing clothing for different temperatures, setting way points, having a mini map covered in icons... These all kinda just seem like open world conventions at this point.

I guess what I am really wondering is that in a world where games like Fallout, The Witcher, Skyrim, Dying Light, MGS5, Mad Max, etc. exists and where open world fatigue is talk about constantly, why is everyone already so in love with a game that seemingly is coming to the party 5 years to late and has yet to show that it is doing something new. Is it simply because Zelda is on in the box. Or perhaps more aptly, Would anyone be this excited if this was a new property being shown in the same way?

I would love to hear what people think.

Avatar image for zeik
#2 Edited by Zeik (5221 posts) -

I just think the game looks cool and has a lot of potential to be fun. (I'm not sure who is getting all hyped over a jump button. That's way down on the list of interesting things.) Sure, being Zelda gives it some extra cache that another game might now have, but simply doing something different with Zelda is not enough to get me excited. A Link Between Worlds was also "different", but I wasn't actually that into that game. It was not quite the direction I wanted to see the series go.

Not that I would have necessarily said "open-world" was my ideal Zelda game either, but seeing it in action what they are doing with the game suits the experience well and capitalizes on the parts of Zelda that I like. I may be a little tired of generic open world games, but if they can properly marry the best parts of Zelda with the best parts of open-world games then I will gladly sign up for that.

Avatar image for relkin
#3 Posted by Relkin (1214 posts) -

Then there are the mechanics that everyone was going nuts for like a jump button for example. They kinda all seem like they had just been ripped form other games. Finding and crafting weapons that break down over time (which is almost never fun), climbing towers to reveal more of the map, having loot, hunting animals, cooking food, changing clothing for different temperatures, setting way points, having a mini map covered in icons... These all kinda just seem like open world conventions at this point.

I can't wait to see what Nintendo does with these open-world conventions.

Avatar image for thebrainninja
#4 Posted by thebrainninja (379 posts) -

I think it's given the benefit of the doubt on the back of the franchise's history; we assume it will have a lot of the same structural/thematic elements, and so we're excited at the possibility of those being married to these new elements. Elements that appear to directly address criticisms of previous franchise entries. That's why it's interesting (and important) for them to show these banal details: because while we've seen these elements before, they have never been in a Zelda game before.

I certainly wouldn't classify myself as a Nintendo fan, but they've earned enough respect for me to "please be excited" over simple triumphs.

Avatar image for liquiddragon
#5 Posted by liquiddragon (3526 posts) -

No but it is. When a company like Nintendo tries something, you give them the benefit of the doubt.

I actually had the same question but w/ God of War and have come to the conclusion that it's interesting because it's God of War, not despite it and I think the same logic can be apply w/ Zelda.

Avatar image for deactivated-582d227526464
#6 Edited by deactivated-582d227526464 (835 posts) -

I think the draw is it's Nintendo taking on all these modern game tropes, and not say, Ubisoft for the 100th time. But I agree, the hype has everything to do with the names attached to it. I think people are hoping it will be a bridge between modern open world games and the more tightly focused Zelda games of yore. Hard to say I'm not excited for that prospect, even though I'm not entirely sure what that entails.

I understand the frustration with the hype though. Zelda carries a certain weight that I think is becoming a little bit undeserved as time passes. Yeah, it's defined generations of gaming, but to my mind the recent games received enough tepid reactions to temper expectations for future entries. Also, some could say Zelda inching towards more modern open world tropes signals too much of a departure from the OG games and is actually a disappointing notion. Time will tell. It's a exciting risk to me nonetheless though.

Avatar image for dixavd
#7 Edited by Dixavd (2907 posts) -

I would be more hyped if this wasn't a Legend of Zelda game. Breath of the Wild is very bitter-sweet for me. I really like all of the 3D Zelda games including Twilight Princess and Skyward Sword (which was my GoTY for 2011 and I still repeatedly think about)... so the idea that I'm not getting that as this is the replacement instead makes me actually feel a little sad. This game looks incredible. I am sure I will 100% BotW, and I'll do every Shrine like I did every island in SW and Wind Waker... but I really liked how Skyward Sword pushed a narrative. It felt like a Studio Ghibli film in art, story and especially the characters. I really want to play this game, but were it not a Zelda game, maybe I could have had that heavily narrative-driven linear story I loved in the recent 3D Zelda games as well as a title which allows Nintendo to make their mark on the open world.

I am conflicted. I am excited. This game looks enthralling. I can't wait to find out more. But the open-ended Zelda games have never been my favourite: I really like how these games build the mix of item abilities in dungeons as the games progress, so the idea of player control in the order of completing them (and how any individual item can only have a limited effect outside of their dungeon because some will be miss-able) really distils my favourite mechanics of these games (hence why I hate the Shadow and Spirit temples in Ocarina of Time). There's another reality where Zelda was put on hiatus and this was a whole new IP from the same studio, and I might have preferred that. Nevertheless, I am infatuated by this game from how it looks and plays.

Also, the idea that because these ideas have been in other games makes it somehow lesser is a really disappointing stance to me. No game is wholly original. They are always just putting their own twist on ideas in other games (and media in general). There are open world, third person, action games I like; there are open world, third person, action games I don't like. This looks like the former to me.

Edit: P.S. I've been waiting a long time for a game to have a modern game that has modern mechanics in it, including a populated world, while still giving me that core emotional response I have to the solitude of Shadow of the Colossus, and the gameplay of has reached that incredible feat. Emptiness with purpose resonates with me. Funny, maybe has the essence of the Shadow of the Colossus open game I was looking for, while The Last Guardian has the focused approach of the Zelda game I want.

Avatar image for milijango
#8 Edited by Milijango (204 posts) -

I'm a bit wary of open world games and have had few positive experiences with them, but remain optimistic about Breath of the Wild. I think Zelda titles have good quality control overall; I don't love any of them, but I have enjoyed all of them (yes, that includes Twilight Princess and Skyward Sword). Even though the recent ones have been weaker overall, I think that dungeon design has gotten better with almost every game, and I hope those skills will elevate this game above the current open world glut. Bethesda RPGs, the Witcher 3, and MGS5 all had shockingly poor level/mission/encounter design so there is a place for Nintendo if they deliver on what Zelda's traditional strengths in addition to the "new" western RPG mechanics.

Avatar image for theblue
#9 Edited by TheBlue (1034 posts) -

Would the reception be the same if it wasn't Zelda? Of course not. One could argue that The Legend of Zelda helped shape gaming as we know it today, so it's safe to say that it has gained a few fans here and there that will stick with it no matter what. Yeah, it's not doing anything new in the broader modern open world video game sense, but it is certain breaking the traditional Zelda mold. The hype surrounding the game isn't about how it's forging a new path for video games, it's about how it's forging a new path for Zelda. It's taking a beloved franchise that has been rooted in tradition for almost two decades and expanding it to this formula that works well and is extremely popular.

Is this Zelda a number of years too late to the party and just riding the open world bandwagon? Yes. Of course it is. Now I understand what you're saying. The world looks fairly empty, some mechanics seem odd and cumbersome at first glance, and things that have been staples of open world games for years really might make you think, "Is this it?" But think about it. How do we know that the world will be that empty come launch? We know it's a tutorial area and perhaps for demo purposes they removed stuff so the demos and footage could remain more focused and be more controlled. Perhaps the other 98% of the map is more densely populated. Maybe the world is intentionally sparse? The demo footage showed decrepit shrines with creatures that seemed frozen in time or dead, perhaps some sort of event happened that caused the sparseness.

Or maybe the Wii U can't handle too much shit on the screen and the game will be empty, boring, and garbage.

The point is you don't know. You can't know until it's done, but I think people are most excited about the potential of this game. We've seen what open world games can do, there's a reason there are so many doing the same thing. You show The Legend of Zelda with the promise of this open world experience, a promise that Nintendo seems intent on delivering based on what they've shown, and yeah, people are gonna get hype.

Avatar image for pezen
#10 Posted by Pezen (2388 posts) -

For me it would, considering the fact that it's a Zelda game means very little to me since I haven't played Zelda since NES. And even saying that it's not a series I have reverence for. I just really liked how the world looked. Listening to them talk about the controls didn't sound great though.

Avatar image for toxin066
#11 Posted by Toxin066 (3544 posts) -

If you had just showed me an open world game like LoZ:BotW without the Zelda name, I'd be more lukewarm towards it. The art style is gorgeous, yeah, but like you mentioned, a lot of this has been done before and I'm not a big fan of degrading equipment and crafting mechanics.

Avatar image for mems1224
#12 Posted by mems1224 (2511 posts) -

I would definitely be interested. I'm a sucker for open world fantasy games

Avatar image for shindig
#13 Posted by Shindig (4963 posts) -

Actually, I think it might. A new IP from Nintendo on this scale would create a different kind of hype.

Avatar image for trilogy
#14 Posted by Trilogy (3208 posts) -

I think people are more excited for a change in Zelda, even if that change is to something that the industry has seen quite a lot of in recent years.

Avatar image for sinusoidal
#15 Posted by Sinusoidal (3608 posts) -

Doubtful. The game looks good, but without the Zelda name, it'd be just another open-world game. Hearing lots of complaints about how the open-world formula is getting stale these days. Except when it's Zelda, I guess.

Maybe this one will be as good as Okami was.

Avatar image for an_ancient
#16 Edited by an_ancient (306 posts) -

I personally could not get behind Dan and Alex and all these outlets being impressed by the art style. It looks barren as fuck, presumably because of the Wii-U limitations and they tried to offset it by having all this grass which for me made it worse as I kept thinking about how that trick was impressive when Oblivion first came out.

My feeling while watching the footage was similar to the reaction of how barren Dark Souls 2 initially was. With that you also had some people who took a long time to acknowledge how limited it looked. It also does not help that in the present context it has quite a resemblance with VR games who target stylized to get framerate. So yeah I hope the dungeons and villages prove me wrong and start telling stories with good level design, because if it's only this outdoors stuff then they better hope they are doing something cool with the combat and other mechanics.

So visually for me the hype is exaggerated, but I do wonder what contributions they will make to the open world genre.

If it was not Zelda it would have landed flat. Splatoon by comparison had me more intrigued because they decided to appropriate team based shooters, while with this new Zelda so far they seem to boringly fall into a very beaten path.

Avatar image for ll_exile_ll
#17 Posted by ll_Exile_ll (3017 posts) -

Doubtful. The game looks good, but without the Zelda name, it'd be just another open-world game. Hearing lots of complaints about how the open-world formula is getting stale these days. Except when it's Zelda, I guess.

Maybe this one will be as good as Okami was.

I see that complaint about the "open world formula" quite often, but I feel like 90% of the those people are referring almost completely to Ubisoft games. The Ubisoft open world style is by far the most formulaic and abundant by a wide margin. Every Ubisoft open world can be directly compared to every other Ubisoft open world. Open world games made by other developers aren't so easy to directly compare. Sure, there are elements shared by all open world games, but other than some surface similarities something like GTA doesn't have all that much in common with Fallout 4 or The Witcher 3.

I think if we didn't have have 2 or 3 Ubisoft open world games all sharing a ton of the same concepts coming out every year, people would be much less likely to think of open world games as being stale. I mostly ignore those games and I'm certainly not tired of open world games, especially when things like GTA and Bethesda games come out like once every five years and series like Zelda, The Witcher, and Dragon Age have only recently been interpreted in an open world type setting (and mostly do their own thing but in an open world).

Avatar image for spitz1000
#18 Edited by spitz1000 (213 posts) -

I think people look at Zelda, or even Nintendo games in general, in a vacuum. They haven't really dappled into these open world games at all if my memory serves, so it's a first for both Zelda as a franchise and Nintendo as a company, which is exciting to see. I also can't wait to see how it works on NX, and what new feature the new console introduces.

Avatar image for skinky
#19 Edited by Skinky (243 posts) -

@barrettalong said;

"The land mass was seemingly empty and void of any real character. I am not talking about towns or NPC as I know Nintendo has said they left them out for story reasons but rather things like enemies or distinct landmarks or any sense that the world is inhabited at all. Again it was very pretty too look at but in all the footage I have scene so far it just seemed empty."

--------------------------------------------------

You should look at pictures of the geology of a number of plateau's. The very word derived from Latin means "flat", while the French derived word means raised up and flat. This makes an interesting environment for certain species to thrive moreso than others. In terms of geology they are dull however. Outside of the Plateau, the geology is very distinct from what I've seen.

That vast land surface in the demo is 1% of the entire games, overworld.

I have posted videos in this forum which show snippets of footage taken outside of the Plateau, and they are far from lacking in personality...

Beyond Great Plateau :

Link: http://youtu.be/dar1t_L2wBk

Skip to 25mins in for new sections of the game.

Hunting and Gathering, and Cooking Explained in Detail:

http://youtu.be/3MtmDoWrV9k

The Great Plateau has the personality of being a safe haven - idyllic like Onset Island in Wind Waker.

I suspect in the story the chasm you see in the distance is blocked, only allowing small Moblins in. I imagine this would partly explain the enemy types in the Great Plateau area.

Shadow of the Colossus and Ico felt that way, along with many other great adventure games. Why, because it intensifies coming out of such moments to awe inspiring action or complexity by various means. You see it in great films also, like Lawrence of Arabia.

As you say yourself, Nintendo removed all character and story elements. They also chose the Great Plateau with good reason I imagine.

The Gathering and upgrading of gear is a hallmark of the series, and it's improvements here are surprisingly complex yet simple to use, a by product of Nintendo and Monolith software working on this game together.

Avatar image for party
#20 Edited by Party (146 posts) -

@relkinsaid:

"I can't wait to see what Nintendo does with these open-world conventions"

Yeah, pretty much this. If this was just another open-world game, I wouldn't be as psyched. Since this is Nintendo and motherfuckin' Zelda, my expectations are dramatically higher. Nintendo has a way of taking genres and concepts in other games and applying a level of polish, charm, and attention to detail that just doesn't exist in most other games. Things like Link humming along to the cooking or Link shivering in the menus when it's cold or even shield surfing are all great examples of the care Nintendo puts into their big marquee products. Even higher level changes like making a Metroid game a first person shooter and actually nailing first person platforming is a great example of how Nintendo doesn't always need to reinvent the video game wheel, just sharpen the hell out of it.

And about the world being empty.. I dunno, from the demos I saw, it looked like the density of "stuff" spread throughout the land was right for me. I remember playing the witcher and sighing as I saw fourteen different question marks (usually boring monster nests or chests with armor that I wouldn't use) litter the path to my next objective. At some point, that game felt a little too densely packed for my tastes and I felt like I was wondering around for the sake of getting rid of those darn question marks rather than just exploring the world. I like Nintendo's approach of not really putting a million icons in your face (though it remains to be seen if unlocking all the "towers" will just result in that) and just letting you take in the world.

Also that art style is incredible. That's just a matter of taste though.

Avatar image for sloppydetective
#21 Posted by SloppyDetective (1618 posts) -

I have very little nostalgia/love for the Zelda franchise. I've never beaten one. So with that being said, I am extremely interested in this game. Yes it seems to be taking a lot of open world conventions, but it seems to be taking ones that work well together and that add to the general tone of the game.

I like the idea of item and food management in order to deal with the elements and problems you run into. I also like the emptiness of the world. And I think those two things were deliberate choices that compliment each other. Open world games have gotten to the point where the world needs to be crammed with repetitive small tasks to make it seemed filled and lived in. This game seems to be taking a much different approach, and for me it looks very refreshing. I know a lot of comparisons to Shadow of the Colossus have been made and I think it's an apt comparison when it comes to the world and tone of it.

The main thing I am worried about is the controls. I wonder how intuitive they are actually going to feel when you sit down with the game for a long while. I know the duders felt they were kind of weird during their demo, but they only got a limited time with them, so I'm hoping they grow on you and feel smoother once you get acclimated to them.

With all this being said, I sold my Wii U a couple months back to help cover some bills I was short on, and I don't know if I will ever actually get to play this game. But that art style is amazing to look at.

Avatar image for thewildcard
#22 Posted by TheWildCard (700 posts) -

It definitely wouldn't, but Nintendo generally gets a benefit of a doubt, and Zelda in particular is near and dear to many a gamer's heart. It can be annoying, but then again Nintendo has earned that goodwill. I generally agree that the game look alright, but nothing about it screams excitment, and the the textures on some of the environment looks pretty underwhelming. That said I get why people are excited at the changes and potential, as there was a decent amount of agree after Skyward Sword that the series needed a change in direction.

@shindig said:

Actually, I think it might. A new IP from Nintendo on this scale would create a different kind of hype.

That's a good point, though again people would be mostly excited because it's attached to Nintendo.

Avatar image for skinky
#23 Edited by Skinky (243 posts) -

I think having desolate landscapes in games has the power of intensifying the feeling of discovery. For an adventure game, that's the biggest hit point of all I think, creating the emotions you get with genuine discovery.

There's also a spiritual and self discovery angle to games like this, certainly Sotc. Desolate places, harsh environments and scenarios are found in many religious texts also, unsurprisingly.

Avatar image for evilsbane
#24 Edited by Evilsbane (5618 posts) -

The land mass was seemingly empty and void of any real character. I am not talking about towns or NPC as I know Nintendo has said they left them out for story reasons but rather things like enemies or distinct landmarks or any sense that the world is inhabited at all.

The giant ruins of the Temple of Time straight from OoT isn't a distinct landmark? The old man under the overhang by the road? The many Moblin camps that you can sneak up on and take their weapons before they see you? I saw plenty of character and potential to explore.

Avatar image for boozak
#25 Posted by BoOzak (2648 posts) -

As much as I love games like Fallout and The Witcher the actual act of moving and navigating enviroments sucks in those games. MGS 5 is a different beast because it gives you so many different ways of interacting with the enviroment and acomplishing your tasks much like what has been shown of Breath of the Wild.

Honestly if it wasnt a Zelda game I wouldnt be as hyped. But that's more to do with Nintendo's talent than having a game where some guy named Link saves some girl named Zelda.

Avatar image for skinky
#26 Posted by Skinky (243 posts) -

@boozak:

Just traversing the environment looks like a lot of fun. I've noticed how easy it can be to climb over large structures once your stamina is up. The section that looks like salt flats on a mountain slope looks insane, It's ridiculously steep. Nintendo wanted us to have fun, gliding and surfing down it.

Avatar image for ajamafalous
#27 Posted by ajamafalous (13820 posts) -

Of course not; the excitement comes from a) it being Nintendo, b) it being Zelda, and c) it being a fresh take on a Zelda game instead of them making Ocarina of Time 7 (or whatever, I don't feel like counting).

I personally have never even finished a Zelda game, and could not give less of a shit about emergent gameplay or games being open world for the sake of being open world, but even I'm super interested to see what they do with it. The new Zelda and the new God of War are interesting precisely because those franchises have rigid histories; a new IP would not have grabbed most people the way those games' demos did because they would've been 'just another game.'

Avatar image for dussck
#28 Posted by Dussck (1054 posts) -

The legacy name sure helps a lot, but the gameplay looks great as well and so do the graphics. It's just a shame I won't be able to play it, since I'm not planning on buying a console for that game alone..

Avatar image for paulmako
#29 Posted by paulmako (1958 posts) -

Even if it wasn't attached to Zelda, I think I would still be interested. The art style alone is worthy of attention. That game looks beautiful. The traversal options and being able to climb almost everything also looks really fun. I haven't seen too much of the game yet but Zelda or not I think it would have generated some interest.

Avatar image for barrettalong
#30 Posted by barrettalong (28 posts) -

@barrettalong said:

The land mass was seemingly empty and void of any real character. I am not talking about towns or NPC as I know Nintendo has said they left them out for story reasons but rather things like enemies or distinct landmarks or any sense that the world is inhabited at all.

The giant ruins of the Temple of Time straight from OoT isn't a distinct landmark? The old man under the overhang by the road? The many Moblin camps that you can sneak up on and take their weapons before they see you? I saw plenty of character and potential to explore.

You are totally right, those things were shown and are in the game, but they kinda feel like game encounters. Which I don't say to to detract from them, all games need these things as they give the player something to do. I guess I was more talking about things that are not necessarily part of the game mechanics.

Take a game like fallout. They have the open world and there are lots of settlements and bandit hideouts and what not but the map is also covered in objects that are there to give the world a sense of place. They don't play any real role in the story and cant be interacted with but they flesh out the world. That is what I thought the demo was lacking.

Avatar image for sinusoidal
#31 Posted by Sinusoidal (3608 posts) -

@party said:

...Even higher level changes like making a Metroid game a first person shooter and actually nailing first person platforming is a great example of how Nintendo doesn't always need to reinvent the video game wheel, just sharpen the hell out of it...

I'd argue Retro Studios had more to do with Prime's success than Nintendo. Look at Other: M which is often and rightfully regarded as total crap. Now, the next Metroid game is apparently a cartoony, multiplayer sports shooter on 3DS? Gah!

Avatar image for sergio
#32 Posted by Sergio (3625 posts) -

If it were a new IP from Nintendo, I'd be just as interested, maybe even more interested. The only thing Nintendo and the Zelda name did was have me convinced sooner that I wanted to play this game. If it were a new IP from any other developer, like Horizon Zero Dawn, it might have taken a little longer. (I'm already convinced about Horizon Zero Dawn. It was just an example.)

Avatar image for skinky
#33 Posted by Skinky (243 posts) -

This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:

Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

Comment and Save

Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.