Zelda: Breath of the Wild [WU,NX]

[Silent_Buddha]

So from what I read and have seen in the videos, this is a more complex Zelda than those of the past. I am left with the following question, "Is this a game young kids can play and enjoy?" I'm asking about the same age of kids who typically have a 3DS. To me, this seems more of a game for older folks, like teenagers to adults. Is that assessment offbase?

I think it might be more appealing to older children and teens than younger children due mostly to the somewhat challenging combat. Some of the puzzles can be tough to execute on as well even if you know how to solve them.

However, when it comes to younger children, they don't mind getting stuck. Getting stuck isn't a bad thing if they are still having fun doing all the other stuff. And I think the world design WRT color palate, style, sounds, creature design, exploration, ability to just do "stuff" will keep most kids glued to the game for hours even if they don't have the skills to finish.

The older Super Mario games on NES and SNES could be brutally difficult sometimes, but I've seen younger children glued to it and demanding to play it despite never getting past world 2 or 3.

Regards,
SB

 

[orangpelupa]

However, when it comes to younger children, they don't mind getting stuck. Getting stuck isn't a bad thing if they are still having fun doing all the other stuff. And I think the world design WRT color palate, style, sounds, creature design, exploration, ability to just do "stuff" will keep most kids glued to the game for hours even if they don't have the skills to finish.

this is also a nice chance for parents and kids to play together and get stuck together!

all kids that i ever met always goes super happy when they can play together and solve things together with other people, regardless of other people's age. I can only imagine if that other person is their parents, i think they will be even more happier.

 

[Rodéric]

Usually a maximum score is meant to express that the game is great and/or revolutionnary and will become a classic that will endure the test of time/a reference that will be a stepping stone for all games to come.
(Such as Ocarina of Time, Mario 64, Half-Life²...)

 

[Entropy]

So from what I read and have seen in the videos, this is a more complex Zelda than those of the past. I am left with the following question, "Is this a game young kids can play and enjoy?" I'm asking about the same age of kids who typically have a 3DS. To me, this seems more of a game for older folks, like teenagers to adults. Is that assessment offbase?

"Older folk"!?
But well, yes, I'd say you need to be able to read to play on your own. (And of course, in many parts of the world you would have to be able to read and understand a foreign language.)
Both combat and some puzzles can be challenging for adults, so kids in the 5-8 span would have a hard time I guess, even though combat as far as I have gotten, can largely be avoided. Interface is complex but well thought out. I'd peg it at 10 years and up for solo play, roughly. Some aspects of it is surprisingly firmly aimed at adults though.

About perfect scores - well it is obviously tied to genre. The new DOOM was immensely satisfying in its' niche. Blasting demonspawn with a polish, intensity and panache at the pinnacle of its kind. But it can't really be directly compared to Zelda, or Witcher 3, or NBA, or Mass Effect 2 or...
To what extent does the game achieve what it sets out to? Does it engage its audience? The answers to these kinds of questions are what goes into a score, I guess. But any single-figure-of-merit is going to be inadequate. The number of dimensions of quality is vastly larger.
Zelda was worth the investment in the Switch for me. I can probably sell it later and take a loss worth roughly a full price game. So, would I say Zelda BotW is worth double a full price game for me? Undoubtedly yes. For me.

 

[Sigfried1977]

Zelda was never really for "kids". Sure, a 6 year old's mind isn't gonna melt when exposed to Zelda's thematic elements, but he'll probably get stuck in the water temple. Depending on which Zelda game you pick, you may also be up against some rather stiff dexterity challenges. A link between worlds on 3ds was not an easy game. Bosses in particular were surprisingly old-school and tough. Breath of the Wild supposedly gets rather unforgiving rather quickly as well. Bosses will gladly one-shot Link, and there's survival aspects to its gameplay which are actually meaningful too. As a matter of fact, the name "Dark Souls" has been dropped on numerous occasions when describing the game.

 

[Pressure]

It auto saves constantly, so you would at most be losing a few minutes.

You can also save whenever you feel like.

It's a game that enables you to get crazy ideas and try them out pretty safely.

Groundhog Day your way out of any trouble or puzzles.

Right now I am personally just exploring and collecting materials for cooking and elixirs.

 

[szymku]

That's a nonsense concept. There's no anything that appeals to everybody, or even most people. Find me 100 million people who think such-and-such is a great film/book/food/game/song, and I'll find you 100 million who don't.

I disagree. Take Godfather for instance. It is uniwersally acclaimed as one of the best movies ever. Of course you will finde people that think it's not that good after all or it's simply bad, but those are extremites, the problem is with them, not with Godfather. There are also people who think that this movie is very good but it do not deserve praise it gets - those are in minority.
Perfect score should be reflected by product universal appeal, as in God Father case.

 

[Sigfried1977]

You'll find plenty of people who dislike the Godfather (or any other critically acclaimed film or book or what have you - I thought the nearly perfectly reviewed, 10+ years in the making kinda stunt that was Boyhood was an incredible chore to sit through for example. So did my brother and my girlfriend) for one reason or another. It's by no means a film with universal appeal either. The subject matter alone is gonna turn loads of people off, not to mention the film's rating outright excludes non-adults from watching it in the first place. As a matter of fact, the films which actually do have universal appeal (I'm simply going by box office successes here) are usually the ones which are not super-well reviewed. Same with movies and books. You practically need to get away from being all things to all people if you wanna create something that will actually be special to someone out there.
I think the Exorcist is a brilliant, near perfect movie for example. It's also a genre film dealing with a very peculiar subject matter, and that is more than enough to turn most people away or even get them up in arms. And that is a-okay. More than okay actually. It's how it should be in a case like that and it certainly in no way diminishes Friedkin's accomplishment.

 

[Picao84]

I think szymku is a Sith. Only a Sith deals in absolutes

 

[BRiT]

I think szymku is a Sith. Only a Sith deals in absolutes

Who is the second? They're always two.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

I disagree. Take Godfather for instance. It is uniwersally acclaimed as one of the best movies ever. Of course you will finde people that think it's not that good after all or it's simply bad, but those are extremites, the problem is with them, not with Godfather. There are also people who think that this movie is very good but it do not deserve praise it gets - those are in minority.
Perfect score should be reflected by product universal appeal, as in God Father case.

I can find plenty more people who don't like The Godfather than do. Of these people, some might also argue that The Godfather is one of the best movies ever on various merits even if it doesn't appeal to them.

Importantly though, your idea of 'most' or 'universal' is based on those who express an opinion. You could have every movie critic in the world claim it a great movie, but the vast majority of human beings won't be the slightest bit interested. Again, 100 million fans, which is an extraordinary number, is but a drop in the ocean of billions of people. The same applies to politics to those who pay attention. In the UK, the 'most popular' political party gets into power. I recall one result from a general election where there was something like 60% turnout and 40% of which voted for Labour, who got into office. In real terms, only 24% of the population actually said they wanted Labour in office - the vast majority wanted someone else.

It's likely some people like FIFA best, some like COD best, some like Uncharted best, some like LBP best, and even if a lot like GTAV best, it's still a minority of gamers. That's the way human diversity works.

 

[Picao84]

It's likely some people like FIFA best, some like COD best, some like Uncharted best, some like LBP best, and even if a lot like GTAV best, it's still a minority of gamers. That's the way human diversity works.

Sorry for off topic, but that is why I loved the Final Fantasy series above all. Every iteration is so different from each other in story, characters, gameplay, world that it created a community that, while disagreeing lots of time on which one is the best, ends up converging in their love to the series. Irrespective of personal preference there is always a common ground

Spoiler

(Enough for people to not see me as a Sith? )

 

[Deleted member 11852]

Who is the second? They're always two.

Sigfried1977 is channeling a lot of darkness. He maybe be the Sith Master of this thread.

 

[Scott_Arm]

Damnit, Nintendo. Why do you have to torture me with this game? I don't want to buy a Switch!

 

[tuna]

Damnit, Nintendo. Why do you have to torture me with this game? I don't want to buy a Switch!

Buy a WiiU

 

[Silent_Buddha]

Watching one of my favorite streamers play Zelda and he's maybe 1/4 of the way through the game after ~35 hours. To compare he absolutely loved HZD and finished that in ~40 hours. And HZD was by no means a small game.

This game is just massive in scope. Which means if I ever manage to get a hold of a Switch and get this game, I'm probably never going to finish it. This might come the closest to an Open World game I'd love, but I inevitably get bored with Open World games. The last one I finished was the first Assassin's Creed. And it's not even the time associated with it (I have over a thousand hours in some MMO's and Waframe is probably getting close to that as well).

Hell, I'm not even sure I want Zelda to play it. I want this Zelda game just to experience it, to experience the world. To put it another way, I just want to fart around in the world of this game. I think in many ways, why I want this Zelda game might be similar to why many people want Minecraft. It's more the experience than the game that they find compelling. Whether that experience be building things, exploring things, destroying things, etc. For me, I love exploration and just playing with stuff. With typical open world games there's all these side quests dotted on the map and the completionist in me can't ignore them. Which takes away from the exploration. I'm not getting that vibe from the Zelda game. I'm not sitting here mentally screaming at the streamer to go do that sidequest that he's ignoring. I'm just wanting to see more of the world and more of the puzzles.

I think it's partially because the map isn't completely covered (slight exaggeration) with markers for various side quests. It seems (or feels) more organic in that you just run into them as you explore.

IE - it doesn't feel like a UBIsoft open world formula game like almost all modern open world games that are not survival games. It also doesn't feel almost empty and pointless like many open world survival games.

I originally thought that the more I saw of this on streams, the less I'd feel compelled to get it. But it's the opposite the more I see, the more I want it.

Regards,
SB

 

[Deleted member 11852]

First hour into Zelda right off completing Horizon last night. Are the graphics jarring? Nope. The world, is absolutely beautiful and it's nice to walk into another open world (like Horizon) that doesn't pepper the map (may, what map!?!?) with objectives.

The lack of tutorials is also fantastic. Apart from watching some combat videos I've seen nothing off Zelda and I felt immensely proud when I managed to light a torch then start another fire.

I HAVE MASTERED FIRE!!! No achievements popping in your face, no music. The game just let's you get on with working things out.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Hell, I'm not even sure I want Zelda to play it. I want this Zelda game just to experience it, to experience the world.
I originally thought that the more I saw of this on streams, the less I'd feel compelled to get it. But it's the opposite the more I see, the more I want it.

Sounds like you want to borrow it to scratch that itch. Cheapest option is buy a Wii U and this and then sell them. Probably other people want to scratch that itch also. Or wait for the Switch emu on PC.

 

[N00b]

IE - it doesn't feel like a UBIsoft open world formula game like almost all modern open world games that are not survival games. It also doesn't feel almost empty and pointless like many open world survival games.

That's funny because I feel the other way round.

I got my switch yesterday and played Zelda for about 7 hours straight. I did two towers, the tutorial area and seven shrines. I liked how the tutorial was handled and the freedom you have. I did not like the (mini-)shrines, they feel pretty shallow, and the world as such. It really feels empty and even paltry. I fought a ton of enemies, opened a dozen chests, only to find some fire arrows, crafting stuff or weapons that will break after, say, 10 hits. What's the point? There is somehow no sense of achievement, of progress, of development. Maybe it gets better with time. But right now I feel like something is missing compared to earlier Zelda games.

On the other hand I played Ghost Recon Wildlands beta through and liked it much better. The story and missions had a certain drive to it. Upgrading and trying out new equipment was a lot of fun. I had a blast trying out a lot of different strategies. And I had a sense of purpose and progress that I'm missing with Zelda.

 

[Entropy]

That's funny because I feel the other way round.

I got my switch yesterday and played Zelda for about 7 hours straight. I did two towers, the tutorial area and seven shrines. I liked how the tutorial was handled and the freedom you have. I did not like the (mini-)shrines, they feel pretty shallow, and the world as such. It really feels empty and even paltry. I fought a ton of enemies, opened a dozen chests, only to find some fire arrows, crafting stuff or weapons that will break after, say, 10 hits. What's the point? There is somehow no sense of achievement, of progress, of development. Maybe it gets better with time. But right now I feel like something is missing compared to earlier Zelda games.

Funny, what you describe as an "empty" world, feels much better to me than the chock-full-of-monsters worlds of my typical PC games, which can only be traversed by plowing through mobs. It's liberating that you don't have to fight to level up, and as you have observed, not even to gain loot. In fact, most fights cost you more in resources (arrows/weapons/food for health) than you gain by looting. The game is trying to tell you something. Listen to it. You'll enjoy it more.

 

[Rootax]

First hour into Zelda right off completing Horizon last night. Are the graphics jarring? Nope. The world, is absolutely beautiful and it's nice to walk into another open world (like Horizon) that doesn't pepper the map (may, what map!?!?) with objectives.

The lack of tutorials is also fantastic. Apart from watching some combat videos I've seen nothing off Zelda and I felt immensely proud when I managed to light a torch then start another fire.

I HAVE MASTERED FIRE!!! No achievements popping in your face, no music. The game just let's you get on with working things out.

I still don't know how to use silex (and I don't want to google it). They say to use a metalic thing in the description, but, I don't get it...

 

[N00b]

Funny, what you describe as an "empty" world, feels much better to me than the chock-full-of-monsters worlds of my typical PC games, which can only be traversed by plowing through mobs. It's liberating that you don't have to fight to level up, and as you have observed, not even to gain loot. In fact, most fights cost you more in resources (arrows/weapons/food for health) than you gain by looting. The game is trying to tell you something. Listen to it. You'll enjoy it more.

Maybe I have become too analytical wrt video games. See, my first video game was Pong. I played that in the seventies on my cousin's console (I forgot the brand). My first console was the Atari 2600. I have played a ton of games in my life. I have thought many hours about game design and I suffer from "Been there, done that".

I have played all the non-handheld Zeldas since OoT. Completed most of them with all hearts. And I played many of the newer handheld Zeldas. And so far I loved all of them.

I think one of the major strengths of the series has been communication with the player. The old games keep you motivated and curious. For example you don't usually find new gear or abilities, you have to earn them through challenges, e.g. by progressing in a shrine. And then you have to use your new weapon or ability to finish the shrine, sometimes in creative ways. And you need to finish certain shrines in order to progress in the game. It's very motivating. That's why every Zelda game so far has worked well. Plus most Zelda games had some open world mechanics wrt side quests.

Compare that to BotW. The game really tosses you a couple of runes in the first four shrines, each of which you can solve in five minutes. And none of these runes have much use in the starting area. The game seems to tell you "Whatever, man. I don't really care what you do. Go take a hike." I don't think that's good game design.

With BotW I'm not really sure what's my motivation? The story? So far it's pretty simplistic even for a Zelda game. The game mechanics? There don't seem to be any really challenges here. The big world? Yeah, it's pretty big. But so far the rewards are pretty small and not so motivating, so that might a well turn out to be a chore. Cooking recipes? Yeah, right. Exploration? That's surely nice, but it only goes so far.

Maybe it get's better as you play. I sure hope this won't be the Force Awakens of Zelda.

 

[Rodéric]

It is similar to the original Legend of Zelda though.