Legend Of Zelda: Breath Of The Wild

Discuss and discover all the great games of yesteryear!

Moderators: mknott, NickThorpe, Darran@Retro Gamer, MMohammed, lcarlson

Post Reply
User avatar
DPrinny
Posts: 24408
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 5:24 pm
Location: Super Mancyland

Re: Legend Of Zelda: Breath Of The Wild

Post by DPrinny » Wed Mar 08, 2017 7:50 pm

Its the WiiU version

The WiiU can be emulated

User avatar
Matt_B
Posts: 5279
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2007 5:30 am
Location: 5 minutes from the beach, 30 seconds from the pub

Re: Legend Of Zelda: Breath Of The Wild

Post by Matt_B » Wed Mar 08, 2017 8:02 pm

DPrinny wrote:Its the WiiU version

The WiiU can be emulated
Yeah, it's running on Cemu.

Although an impressive technical feat, most games are far from playable on it as frame rates are very low and there are a lot of glitches.

I suspect it'll be a while before we see a working Switch emulator.

User avatar
The Beans
Posts: 3635
Joined: Sat May 19, 2012 12:18 pm

Re: Legend Of Zelda: Breath Of The Wild

Post by The Beans » Thu Mar 09, 2017 1:10 am

pratty wrote:I was asking about overall geographic size rather than things to do and game length, though I do appreciate bigger isn't always better.

As both you and Matt point it there seems there's a balance to it, but even then there are probably gamers at opposite ends of the scale, players that want a direct and streamlined expereience and those that want to get totally lost in a world where finding a needle in a haystack is part of the fun.
I see BotW as a streamlined experience whichever end of that scale you're on. It has far less rpg elements than most other open world games. It's essentially a simple action game spread across a very large playing area. In fact, I'd go so far as to say it feels somewhat basic and generic in a lot of ways when compared to games like Witcher 3, or even Dragon's Dogma: Dark Arisen for that matter. But then hanging the action rpg label on the Zelda games has always been a bit dubious imo and I'm finding the "open world" thing isn't quite working out either for some reason. There's derinitely a big world to explore but because I've played other games it feels like BotW has a lot of things missing. It's Open World-Lite I guess. Maybe that's the attraction.
If it's slower than me, dumber than me and it tastes good ... tough titty.

User avatar
Grizzly
Posts: 2465
Joined: Tue Apr 07, 2009 2:00 pm
Location: Berkshire

Re: Legend Of Zelda: Breath Of The Wild

Post by Grizzly » Thu Mar 09, 2017 6:33 am

The Beans wrote:
pratty wrote:I was asking about overall geographic size rather than things to do and game length, though I do appreciate bigger isn't always better.

As both you and Matt point it there seems there's a balance to it, but even then there are probably gamers at opposite ends of the scale, players that want a direct and streamlined expereience and those that want to get totally lost in a world where finding a needle in a haystack is part of the fun.
I see BotW as a streamlined experience whichever end of that scale you're on. It has far less rpg elements than most other open world games. It's essentially a simple action game spread across a very large playing area. In fact, I'd go so far as to say it feels somewhat basic and generic in a lot of ways when compared to games like Witcher 3, or even Dragon's Dogma: Dark Arisen for that matter. But then hanging the action rpg label on the Zelda games has always been a bit dubious imo and I'm finding the "open world" thing isn't quite working out either for some reason. There's derinitely a big world to explore but because I've played other games it feels like BotW has a lot of things missing. It's Open World-Lite I guess. Maybe that's the attraction.

The difference as i see it is the means of which to approach the open world. While some open world games offer an element of freedom, they do still remain rigid in their core structure, often having breadcrumb quests to the main destination that you ought to follow. Then when you do reach a mission destination you are often tasked with maybe up to three ways in which you can succeed at it. Zelda offers more in general.

Take for example the typical Far Cry scenario of clearing a camp of enemies, Using this example as it gives you the most choice versus the Zelda option.

So in Far Cry three you could clear the camps out in a lot of different ways, you could stealth in to kill the guards, Set a caged animal free to thin numbers, snipe from a distance or just go in guns blazing. The problem that Far Cry camps had were a lack of variation and they almost always were on a plateau with little to no verticality.

Zelda: Breath of the Wild on the other hand gives you a whole host more tricks. Due to the lack of guns and the weapon durabilities you have to think outside of the box each time you want to clear a camp. Options could range from picking off an explosive barrel cluster to ignite the entire camp, paraglide in on the lookouts and take them out before they can raise alarm, Using magnesis to pick up metal blocks and drop them on enemy heads, Setting your weapon on fire using a wooden weapon and the campfire to gain a damage advantage in a fight, strategically placing bombs down, Running away with bombs and dropping them behind you (although watch out as the enemies can kick these back at you), pick them off at a distance with arrows, ride in with your horse to attack from horseback, whistle for the enemies before setting fire to the grass they are standing on, use puddles of water to place iceblocks to use as cover and etc.

Now i can see what you are saying about it seeming empty, but the example above and the sheer amount of discovery leads to a more organic experience in my mind. The difference is the want to find more areas and work out what is being hidden, or seeing what may be up the top of a mountain. In other open world games you get into a loop where things start to repeat until the credits roll, In Zelda, after 20 or so hours this has not happened. There has always been something new, there hasn't been a tried and tested method to doing a certain thing at any given time and the game constantly forces you to think differently in a way that no other game has done before. To my mind that makes it somewhat incomparable to other open world games, the attention to detail simply elevates it.
I write for...
Image
Check us out for news, reviews and features on the blackest of consoles.Image

User avatar
The Beans
Posts: 3635
Joined: Sat May 19, 2012 12:18 pm

Re: Legend Of Zelda: Breath Of The Wild

Post by The Beans » Thu Mar 09, 2017 9:38 am

Grizzly wrote:
The difference as i see it is the means of which to approach the open world. While some open world games offer an element of freedom, they do still remain rigid in their core structure, often having breadcrumb quests to the main destination that you ought to follow. Then when you do reach a mission destination you are often tasked with maybe up to three ways in which you can succeed at it. Zelda offers more in general.

Take for example the typical Far Cry scenario of clearing a camp of enemies, Using this example as it gives you the most choice versus the Zelda option.

So in Far Cry three you could clear the camps out in a lot of different ways, you could stealth in to kill the guards, Set a caged animal free to thin numbers, snipe from a distance or just go in guns blazing. The problem that Far Cry camps had were a lack of variation and they almost always were on a plateau with little to no verticality.

Zelda: Breath of the Wild on the other hand gives you a whole host more tricks. Due to the lack of guns and the weapon durabilities you have to think outside of the box each time you want to clear a camp. Options could range from picking off an explosive barrel cluster to ignite the entire camp, paraglide in on the lookouts and take them out before they can raise alarm, Using magnesis to pick up metal blocks and drop them on enemy heads, Setting your weapon on fire using a wooden weapon and the campfire to gain a damage advantage in a fight, strategically placing bombs down, Running away with bombs and dropping them behind you (although watch out as the enemies can kick these back at you), pick them off at a distance with arrows, ride in with your horse to attack from horseback, whistle for the enemies before setting fire to the grass they are standing on, use puddles of water to place iceblocks to use as cover and etc.
One of the issues I'm having with the Zelda fanboys, and to a lesser degree with the reviewers, is the obvious bias you show here. Or ignorance. Nearly all the extra attacking options you put forward for the Zelda game are actually available in the Far Cry games!
BotW is a great game for sure but it borrows heavily from existing open world standards. The fact you think using fire is some sort of unique approach would indicate you haven't touched the Far Cry franchise since the original game.
If it's slower than me, dumber than me and it tastes good ... tough titty.

User avatar
Grizzly
Posts: 2465
Joined: Tue Apr 07, 2009 2:00 pm
Location: Berkshire

Re: Legend Of Zelda: Breath Of The Wild

Post by Grizzly » Thu Mar 09, 2017 10:02 am

The Beans wrote:
Grizzly wrote:
The difference as i see it is the means of which to approach the open world. While some open world games offer an element of freedom, they do still remain rigid in their core structure, often having breadcrumb quests to the main destination that you ought to follow. Then when you do reach a mission destination you are often tasked with maybe up to three ways in which you can succeed at it. Zelda offers more in general.

Take for example the typical Far Cry scenario of clearing a camp of enemies, Using this example as it gives you the most choice versus the Zelda option.

So in Far Cry three you could clear the camps out in a lot of different ways, you could stealth in to kill the guards, Set a caged animal free to thin numbers, snipe from a distance or just go in guns blazing. The problem that Far Cry camps had were a lack of variation and they almost always were on a plateau with little to no verticality.

Zelda: Breath of the Wild on the other hand gives you a whole host more tricks. Due to the lack of guns and the weapon durabilities you have to think outside of the box each time you want to clear a camp. Options could range from picking off an explosive barrel cluster to ignite the entire camp, paraglide in on the lookouts and take them out before they can raise alarm, Using magnesis to pick up metal blocks and drop them on enemy heads, Setting your weapon on fire using a wooden weapon and the campfire to gain a damage advantage in a fight, strategically placing bombs down, Running away with bombs and dropping them behind you (although watch out as the enemies can kick these back at you), pick them off at a distance with arrows, ride in with your horse to attack from horseback, whistle for the enemies before setting fire to the grass they are standing on, use puddles of water to place iceblocks to use as cover and etc.
One of the issues I'm having with the Zelda fanboys, and to a lesser degree with the reviewers, is the obvious bias you show here. Or ignorance. Nearly all the extra attacking options you put forward for the Zelda game are actually available in the Far Cry games!
BotW is a great game for sure but it borrows heavily from existing open world standards. The fact you think using fire is some sort of unique approach would indicate you haven't touched the Far Cry franchise since the original game.
I listed examples not full sets for both sides of the equation. I certainly never suggested that fire was unique to this one Zelda game, but i will say the way in which you can use it can be described as unique. How many games let you use fire to create updrafts so you can gain elevation for paragliding for instance? The difference here is that there are multiple ways you can use each tool, Far Cry pretty much just lets you burn things.
I write for...
Image
Check us out for news, reviews and features on the blackest of consoles.Image

User avatar
HalcyonDaze00
Posts: 4621
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2008 6:20 pm

Re: Legend Of Zelda: Breath Of The Wild

Post by HalcyonDaze00 » Thu Mar 09, 2017 10:14 am

The Beans wrote:
pratty wrote:I was asking about overall geographic size rather than things to do and game length, though I do appreciate bigger isn't always better.

As both you and Matt point it there seems there's a balance to it, but even then there are probably gamers at opposite ends of the scale, players that want a direct and streamlined expereience and those that want to get totally lost in a world where finding a needle in a haystack is part of the fun.
I see BotW as a streamlined experience whichever end of that scale you're on. It has far less rpg elements than most other open world games. It's essentially a simple action game spread across a very large playing area. In fact, I'd go so far as to say it feels somewhat basic and generic in a lot of ways when compared to games like Witcher 3, or even Dragon's Dogma: Dark Arisen for that matter. But then hanging the action rpg label on the Zelda games has always been a bit dubious imo and I'm finding the "open world" thing isn't quite working out either for some reason. There's derinitely a big world to explore but because I've played other games it feels like BotW has a lot of things missing. It's Open World-Lite I guess. Maybe that's the attraction.
indeed, for gamers who have spent time outside the myopic nintendo bubble, botw offers very little new, it's just the nintendo herd who are getting embarrassingly carried away with themselves.

User avatar
The Beans
Posts: 3635
Joined: Sat May 19, 2012 12:18 pm

Re: Legend Of Zelda: Breath Of The Wild

Post by The Beans » Thu Mar 09, 2017 10:44 am

HalcyonDaze00 wrote:
The Beans wrote:I see BotW as a streamlined experience whichever end of that scale you're on. It has far less rpg elements than most other open world games. It's essentially a simple action game spread across a very large playing area. In fact, I'd go so far as to say it feels somewhat basic and generic in a lot of ways when compared to games like Witcher 3, or even Dragon's Dogma: Dark Arisen for that matter. But then hanging the action rpg label on the Zelda games has always been a bit dubious imo and I'm finding the "open world" thing isn't quite working out either for some reason. There's derinitely a big world to explore but because I've played other games it feels like BotW has a lot of things missing. It's Open World-Lite I guess. Maybe that's the attraction.
indeed, for gamers who have spent time outside the myopic nintendo bubble, botw offers very little new, it's just the nintendo herd who are getting embarrassingly carried away with themselves.
Have you actually played it? The game is firmly rooted in standard open world tropes, that's the genre it's in afterall, but it definitely has it's own feel and most of that is down to genuine polish and offering some things that are new or at least "nearly new". However you look at it, the overall implementation is pretty sublime (on the Switch). I don't think it's the Second Coming of gaming like some people seem to think but it's easily going to be one the best games this gen. I think the 10/10 reviews are a bit gushing but I wouldn't begrudge it a few 9s too much. Can't really blame the Nintendo "herd" for liking the game. It's a quality product, especially if it's your introduction to open world freedom.
If it's slower than me, dumber than me and it tastes good ... tough titty.

User avatar
Nautical Rudie
Posts: 291
Joined: Thu Jul 01, 2010 11:26 am

Re: Legend Of Zelda: Breath Of The Wild

Post by Nautical Rudie » Thu Mar 09, 2017 11:02 am

Last time I played an open world I sunk into this much was Red Dead Redemption, and event then I mostly followed the story, just getting sidetracked here and there. For Zelda I'm 30 hours down and I've only followed the story as far as the first Divine Beast. I find I get sidetracked, get sidetracked again, then realise that 6 hours have somehow vanished. I'm defintiely a huge Zelda fan, but this is one of the least Zelda feeling games in the series as far as the tropes and motifs go, I think its just a wonderfully realized world thats easy to get lost in. Its a world away from my experience of GTA V, where I got 20 hours in and was starting to get bored, put it down, and never touched it again. None of the side stuff in GTA V felt fun to me, but in Zelda I'm just getting totally wrapped up in discovering stuff.
3DS Friend Code: 0130-1873-6926. Give me a shout if you add me!

User avatar
Rayne
Posts: 6610
Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 2:51 pm
Location: Scotland!

Re: Legend Of Zelda: Breath Of The Wild

Post by Rayne » Thu Mar 09, 2017 1:52 pm

HalcyonDaze00 wrote:indeed, for gamers who have spent time outside the myopic nintendo bubble, botw offers very little new, it's just the nintendo herd who are getting embarrassingly carried away with themselves.
That's just a daft statement to make, Breath of the Wild offers plenty of things that are new. Viewed as an entry to the Zelda franchise at large, it's staggeringly different and offers a whole new take on the series. Compared against other open-world style games, it still sets itself apart and a variety of ways. I get that some people's instinctive reaction to seeing something be universally praised would be to trash it, it just seems a little sad imo. If you sat down to play it with an open mind, you'd likely have a great time.
Image

User avatar
Havantgottaclue
Posts: 2668
Joined: Sat Apr 19, 2008 9:20 am
Location: Usually on a train

Re: Legend Of Zelda: Breath Of The Wild

Post by Havantgottaclue » Sun Mar 12, 2017 7:32 am

I own a PS4 Pro and a gaming PC. I've got what I need to enjoy cutting-edge gaming at 4K.

I am most definitely outside this putative Nintendo "bubble", if it exists at all.

But I have to say that while I haven't yet played it enough to decide whether it is a masterpiece or not, I've certainly enjoyed it a great deal so far. It couldn't be as graphically impressive as something like Horizon Zero Dawn given the disparity in GPU power, but still, looking out from a high peak across the landscape is awe-inspiring. It also plays well, but interestingly it is quite punishing. While roving mobs don't really cause too much of a problem, there are plenty of enemies that you just have to scarper from, and woe-betide you if you misjudge the amount of effort it takes to climb a cliff face. Even when you have the paraglider, you need stamina to glide so if you've already run out while on the cliff face you are in big trouble.

I started out by thinking HZD was more impressive but BotW has taken over for now, even at home.
Soon you will have forgotten all things: soon all things will have forgotten you. (Marcus Aurelius, Meditations, Book 7)

User avatar
Megamixer
Posts: 14892
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 6:18 am
Location: Staffs, UK

Re: Legend Of Zelda: Breath Of The Wild

Post by Megamixer » Sun Mar 12, 2017 7:20 pm

Finally made a start on it this afternoon and really enjoying it thus far. Not too fussed if there are bigger or more impressive open-world games out there that have come before (is it really important anyway? Let's just enjoy games for what they are rather than comparing...) because this one is lovely based purely on the art style alone. Died a couple of times already, the second time being when a boulder suddenly turned into a huge golem-like monster and killed me by throwing a rock while I was working out how to kill it. Wasn't expecting that to be fair!

Just enjoying wondering around at the moment, really.
Retro is a state of mind, and cares not for your puny concepts like dates and calendars.

User avatar
ShadowMan
Posts: 11100
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 1:50 pm
Location: 200X
Contact:

Re: Legend Of Zelda: Breath Of The Wild

Post by ShadowMan » Sun Mar 12, 2017 7:36 pm

Megamixer wrote:Finally made a start on it this afternoon and really enjoying it thus far. Not too fussed if there are bigger or more impressive open-world games out there that have come before (is it really important anyway? Let's just enjoy games for what they are rather than comparing...) because this one is lovely based purely on the art style alone. Died a couple of times already, the second time being when a boulder suddenly turned into a huge golem-like monster and killed me by throwing a rock while I was working out how to kill it. Wasn't expecting that to be fair!

Just enjoying wondering around at the moment, really.
It can also 1 hit KO you by falling on you if your not careful (as I found out). He's a fairly easy boss once you get his pattern down though, I also found a giant Skeleton boss at night that was cool (and again, as long as your careful he's not too tough).
My Complete Megaman/Rockman collection: http://retrogamer.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=26485 *Updated 22/05/2011*

User avatar
Matt_B
Posts: 5279
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2007 5:30 am
Location: 5 minutes from the beach, 30 seconds from the pub

Re: Legend Of Zelda: Breath Of The Wild

Post by Matt_B » Sun Mar 12, 2017 10:22 pm

Havantgottaclue wrote:But I have to say that while I haven't yet played it enough to decide whether it is a masterpiece or not, I've certainly enjoyed it a great deal so far. It couldn't be as graphically impressive as something like Horizon Zero Dawn given the disparity in GPU power, but still, looking out from a high peak across the landscape is awe-inspiring. It also plays well, but interestingly it is quite punishing. While roving mobs don't really cause too much of a problem, there are plenty of enemies that you just have to scarper from, and woe-betide you if you misjudge the amount of effort it takes to climb a cliff face. Even when you have the paraglider, you need stamina to glide so if you've already run out while on the cliff face you are in big trouble.
It's worth remembering that you can almost always teleport to the safety of the nearest shrine or tower. That's not always going to get you out of the middle of a fight, but it certainly does help when you find yourself stranded somewhere and unable to get out. Getting a good network of teleport locations unlocked will save you on a lot of back-tracking too, plus you can definitely use the extra hearts.

As for the graphics, I'd think they're maybe 10% hardware limitations and 90% artistic decisions, as opposed to Skyward Sword where it seems like they had Hobson's choice but to go for something very low-fi. Give it another five or ten years and they'll still look great, where other games will be very obviously showing their age.

User avatar
JamesC
Posts: 396
Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2014 1:51 pm
Location: Norwich

Re: Legend Of Zelda: Breath Of The Wild

Post by JamesC » Mon Mar 13, 2017 9:07 am

I have to say, I'm struggling to enjoy this game.

To give some idea of my background, I've played all of the Zelda games over the years - some through to completion, others I've become frustrated with and left halfway through.
My favourite game in the series is Link Between Worlds (I generally prefer 2D Zelda) while my favourite of the 3D games is The Wind Waker.

So far (only a few hours in) I've found the game to be more irritating than enjoyable. Yes, it's very polished, looks beautiful and some of the mechanics are a welcome change (I love the foraging and cooking - much better than cutting the grass to find hearts).
Minor irritants are to be found everywhere though - here are some of the small things that make me grind my teeth:
- Annoying NPCs that make silly noises.
- Annoying NPCs with 'humourous' dialogue.
- Horrible plinky plonky piano music.
- Boring movement (more on this to come).
- Pointless tasks.

Some of these things (like the NPCs) are just par for the course with Zelda and you know what to expect going in. If the rest of the game was really enjoyable these things could easily be overlooked - most of them are just a bit of 'flavour' after all.
Unfortunately there are key mechanics in the game design that I'm struggling to see as anything other than annoyingly obstructive.
- Breaking weapons. I can completely understand why a tree branch would break after a few hits. Or indeed a rusty sword. But substantial weapons breaking after just a few hits seems silly to me. I should be able to chop up moblins with a woodcutting axe until the cows come home.
- Climbing. I have no idea if they could have made this more boring or if they've hit the zenith of interactive voyeuristic paint drying scenarios. It's painfully slow and dull.
- Dynamic weather. Something I really like the idea of (and still do in theory) but in practice it's plain annoying. When I'm climbing a wall and it starts raining, making me fall to my death, I don't think 'fantastic game design', I think 'how incredibly annoying'. It reminds me of a time me and a friend were playing Psycho Fox - got right near the end and the electricity meter ran out. Who know's, maybe my mates mum was just trying to enhance our gaming experience by introducing an unpredictable variable?
- Pointless tasks - 'Go and get the blue flame in the village and light that fire outside' says the annoying (possibly the most annoying one I've met so far) NPC. So off I go, get the blue flame, making sure to light lanterns with the flame en-route just in case. Then it starts raining and my torch goes out. Now I can hang around and chop trees or something until the rain stops or go and find a campfire and jump a few hours but it's just annoying. Maybe I was supposed to learn something from that but it certainly wasn't fun.

Anyway, that's how I feel about it at the moment. I'll persevere - hopefully it'll just click at some point and I'll start to enjoy it.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests