Even if Open World Zelda is technically the OG Zelda the more linear style of Zelda was used for so long that it's basically the OG style of Zelda.

@@Andycandyman24 That's not how it works. The original is always the original.

Saying that Botw is going back to its roots with zelda games is so false. The first 2D zelda games were open world, yes, BUT, there were still some areas closed that prohibited the player from entering, forcing you to progress with the story and other quests to unlock them. So you couldn't do what you want whenever you wanted to, you were still bound, to a smaller degree than the following 3D zelda games, you were still bound to a linear progression of the story.

​@@TumblrCats I disagree. As I said, Breath of the Wild is the original experience on steroids. It's also far closer to the experience I was expecting with Zelda 64 than what we got with Ocarina of Time. And no, I don't ever remember being stuck for hours wandering back and forth through dungeons trying to find a single key/switch needed to proceed with the rest of the game as was the case in Ocarina of Time through to Skyward Sword. They were more about experimentation and exploration, particularly the original Zelda (on the experimentation front). Ocarina of Time did some interesting things, but Breath of the Wild did the Zelda experience a lot better. It's the game I was waiting for since "Zelda 64" entered the discussion.

​@@lindenstromberg6859Well first off, you should be harping on a Link to the Past for creating the formula, not Ocarina. OoT is just 3D aLttP. And it grabbed a lot from Link's Awakening as well. Second, BotW and TotK being a "return to series roots" is complete marketing BS. Zelda I might have had an open world, but the focus was entirely on the dungeons and unlocking sections of the map from items. You literally can't progress past dungeon 3 without linearity from item locks. It wasn't even originally going to have the open world but decided to include it to break the levels (the dungeons) up. This franchise used to have a reputation known for it's dungeons. For being a puzzle box you open from the inside. That's what made it unique even if other stuff got more sales. Now it's just a generic open world designed to cater to the mainstream audience because Nintendo is late to the industry.

fr like I don't want oot again again i don't want botw

Yeah because pissing off both sides is TOTALLY the play.

@@Andycandyman24 That's what they did with TOTK. People who liked traditional hated it, and people who liked (liked, not loved) BOTW hated it. Skyward sword split the community to. The next Zelda game will do the same thing.

@@RetroCheats i think that is a huge simplification of people's feelings on TOTK.

@@Andycandyman24 It was more of the same... and after they beat it, they were not too found of the open world, since a lot of people tend hated the fact they needed to do a lot of shrines to get stronger, and they wanted to progress the story, but got their butt kicked because they were not strong enough. By the end, they enjoyed it overall, but they did not want to experience that again.

​@@RetroCheatsI'm pretty sure needing to through 5 loading screens for each piece of heart equivalent is more annoying than needing to farm hearts overall. Besides, the balancing is whack, you dont need hearts to be stronger, just level up your armor twice and it's balanced. Or all the way and even high end enemies will only scratch you.

You're welcome bro, good luck!

Garbage Comment.

Don't tell anyone

Yes because shoot eyeball on wall or push box over switch 6:37 were amazing puzzles. 🙄

Zelda is “handicapped” in the roleplaying department because it’s not an RPG. None of the games save for Zelda 2 are. Tracking through empty worlds towards the points of interest has been part of every 3D Zelda game. In fact every pre-BotW 3D Zelda, except Skyward Sword, has had way emptier overworlds than BotW and TotK. And ironically Skyward Sword was widely criticised for cutting the connected world in favour of a more focused and filled adventure. Because people never actually had that much of a problem with empty worlds. In fact I would argue that most people probably preferred exploring the over worlds compared to solving the dungeons, which is once again supported by Skyward Swords reception. And that’s because a lot of people genuinely just like exploring cool worlds in video games, especially 3D ones. That’s why OoT was so popular, that’s why people loved Shadow of the Colossus and GTA3 and Morrowind and The Witcher 3. And even the old 3D Zelda was at its best when it opened up. When you finally freed all of Hyrule from the Twilight Realm in TP or when you can finally explore the whole sea in Wind Waker. What Nintendo did with BotW was just making the act of exploring and traversing the world more interesting with the free climbing and glider and then the Ultra Hand stuff in TotK, while also designing the combat, gameplay loop in a way that rewards interacting with the world. Not the mention they created the world in such a way that new points of interest would always be visible from high-up places. That’s interesting, a lot of people just really that. You can prefer the old linear more story focused games, but there’s a lot of merit to this new approach. I don’t remember the reason why I went to Death Mountain in Twilight Princess. Something with the Gorons, of course. But I really just went there because that’s what I had to do to progress to other more interesting areas. I still remember why I went to Death Mountain in BotW, because there was a giant creature climbing on its side and because I wanted to glide down from the top. I remember why I went to Rito village, why I went to Hateno and Kakariko. I remember tracking my way through rain and shock arrows to get to Zora’s Domain. I remember two very different experiences getting to Gerudo Town in two different playthroughs. I remember stumbling upon Lurelin and Robby’s Lab and the Mazes and Eventide and Tarry Town and a bunch of other stuff. For some people these more natural gameplay-focused experiences stick with them more. And let’s also not forget that the old Zelda formula has been ever more criticised with every title until BotW. With basically every 3D game after OoT being controversial in some way. I’m not saying the same won’t happen for the new formula, but let’s give them a few more games before they need to completely rethink their approach again.

@ Those are some interesting details and you seem very eloquent, but you’re missing the problem entirely. The new formula doesn’t provide a proper story for the world and its characters. And the reason it’s costing us a good story? Simply to let us choose the order by which we travel places. That’s like selling the house because you want to buy a bed. Am I supposed to be happy that I can start with the Zora domain instead of the Gorons so long as I’m willing to give away the overarching story? You used plenty of examples of the old games and their attempts at open worlds, but all those had a linear story to serve as the backbone. You said Zelda it’s not an RPG game which is why it doesn’t do Roleplay, but that’s not why I bring that up. I brought it up because Zelda it’s now trying to be an open world that lets you go anywhere from the beginning, and that comes at the cost of the story, and that’s a handicap for a game that doesn’t do Roleplay well. Those quests I mentioned in Skyrim are each a story on its own. That’s why those games can get away with letting you go anywhere from the start. The next game can come out and let you go anywhere you want from the beginning and reuse the memory style for storyline. It absolutely can, it’s just going to be an inferior product to what it could be. So to be clear, the problem it’s the cost for a proper linear story, it’s simply not worth it. Other games in the open world genre compensate the lack of linearity with Roleplay solid side quest, and Zelda can’t do Roleplay the way they can.

@@alexisguillen8400 I think our main disagreement comes from whether or not we think the linear storytelling is worth trading off for the open world approach. I think it is. The possibility for emergent individual storytelling where you do things out of your own motivation has given me a lot more memorable moments than previous Zelda stories ever did. And I do think the lighter narrative helps with that, even compared to other open world games. GTA5 definitely has the more interesting plot on paper, but translated into an actual game I think it falls short of what BotW archives. Because in BotW exploring at your own leisure and following the main story don’t feel like they clash with one another because of the way the story is set up and because the moments of forced linearity are short and sweet. Yes, older Zelda games had better stories, but they were always better at gameplay than at storytelling. I think the best narrative moments came from interesting character arcs (Zelda in Spirit Tracks, Midna in Twilight Princess) and from more atmospheric moments (basically all of Majora’s Mask). And don’t get me wrong, I do think there’s a lot of improvements to be made. The memory style storytelling worked for BotW, not so much for TotK. I think they should reevaluate that approach or at least how they integrate it. Personally I think the most obvious improvements would be bringing back companions (though make sure to not make them too intrusive) and giving the games an actual mid-point with story developments, just like how older titles handled it. With one set of dungeons before and one set after that mid point which should still be doable in any order. Being able to beat Ganon right out of the tutorial always felt more like a statement rather than an intended option. I’m basically describing what Evhoes of Wisdom has done an yeah, basically that on a grander scale with better presentation would be ideal for me.

@ Agree on that. What Echoes of Wisdom did could easily be done to incorporate heavier story telling which will solve the issues without going completely towards linearity. So let’s hope they get it right. However I do need to say this, problems don’t start the second they happen (BoTW 2017), they start the last time something was done right (Skyward Sword 2011) and end the second another right it’s done. Which would be 2028 for the next game if they get the story right at a 17 years wait. And that’s coming from someone who loved both BoTW and ToTK stories, but understands they suffered by their limitations. If not and they don’t get a solid story right, the wait becomes another five years and the fandom goes 22 years without an extensive storyline. In that time a baby could be born, grown into an adult and have a child of their own. The fans who want a proper Zelda story to tie the world it takes places, will be apathetic at that point. I’m telling you this because even though I think we reached an agreement, I’m of the opinion that Zelda it’s known for story telling amidst Nintendo franchises, it’s why theorists are so passionate. Because we have the Xeno series and Fire Emblem these days but those weren’t all that popular when most of us grew up. Also, you already pointed to partners which kinda solves the issue I’m about to bring a little bit, but these last two Zelda’s have felt lonely because of the decentralized style of story. Being lost in the wild has as much of a calming aspect as it has an anxiety one. But I agree to most of what you just said, I just needed to voice my worries.

@ And that’s fair. Of course I would prefer the next big Zelda to have a great story as well. But only if it doesn’t come at the cost of compromising what I found to be the best adventure gameplay I ever experienced. We’ll see what the future holds, for now I’m just happy to move on from BotWs Hyrule. Let’s hope they find the right balance, I’m optimistic.

Hell yeah