It was a feature that was present in every 3D Zelda game (barring Skyward Sword) since Ocarina of Time. Why not include it? It would give more options and add more depth to the combat. For example, swords would have a thrust attack that takes more time to execute, but gives longer range. Even if in the end, it is as you say, just cosmetic, so what? Cosmetics are important as well. Going into combat and seeing the same animations over and over again is not a pleasant thing to see, and detracts from the experience. It seems like such a minor thing to include, and was standard, so I don't think it's unreasonable.Let's be honest; outside of Skyward in a practical sense, this is an almost entirely cosmetic loss. No Zelda I have played has especially developed, complex or challenging one-on-one sword combat.
In the other Zelda games you had dungeon items along with the sword to add more weapon "types" to the game. Those items are for the most part, absent in this game. Because of this there is the expectation that there be a little bit more variety in terms of the available weapons. I'm not complaining about the amount of weapon types, it's fine to only have 6 or 7. What I'm complaining about is the lack of differentiated move sets between the weapon types. Every sword acts the exact same, even theCompared to the one or, at best, two types of weapons in other Zeldas?
I wouldn't say the AI is that much better than any of the previous Zelda games, or that any challenge in fighting most enemies has to do with their AI. When I was playing through the game, fighting the same enemy with a different weapon never felt that much different to me. There isn't enough variance in the enemy recolors to consider them a separate enemy. It's not necessarily a game play issue, there is an emotional element as well. It is hard not to realize that you are fighting the same enemies over and over again. This detracts from the experience. Even if enemies had roughly the same move sets, but were entirely different looking, this would be a massive improvement. This is not to undercut the main point though. There are MANY niches that were not fulfilled by the available enemy types, and as a result fighting becomes a lackluster experience.Would more enemy variety be nice? Of course, but when you think about the quality of the enemies (the AI, the challenge, the designs, and the variety that emerges from the various grades, weapon types, environmental context and so on)
No, I'm not so sure about that. I'll explain. If we're using Wind Waker as an example (another Zelda game with relatively poor enemy variety), you have to understand that each enemy has a purpose, a unique challenge. This is something that BOTW SEVERELY lacks. In BOTW you have bipedal armed humanoids that you are fighting most of the time. The strategy for fighting them, and the circumstances in which you fight them is all very similar. They are in camps, you see them and then go fight them. To beat them, dodge their attacks with side steps and backflips, then attack them. Compare this to Wind Waker:Did WW have more enemies? Sure, but did that actually result in more diverse or engaging game-play? No way.
Armos: Usually encountered in groups, can only be attacked from behind. You need to get behind them to do damage. Once they are attacked they go berserk and you have to run away while they explode.
Armos Knight: The exact opposite of Armos, you have to confront these enemies from the front with a well timed bomb throw. There is pressure to do this correctly as it hops towards you.
Floor Master: You have to not only avoid this enemy's shadow, but be careful while fighting it in close range as well, if it manages to grab you, your progress is reset.
Rat: Small, sneaky, will creep up behind you and bump into you. Will steal your items.
Miniblin: Appear out of nowhere in large groups, you need to be aware of your surroundings at all times until their chants disappear.
Mothula: Dispenses Morths that encumber you and slow you down, making you vulnerable to attacks from itself and other enemies.
Those are a few examples to show you what I mean. Each enemy has a specific niche that it fulfills. When you combine this with MULTIPLE enemies existing together, you have to be careful of many things. Not so much the case in BOTW when most of the enemies you are fighting are bipedal humanoids with similar tactics. Now would these multiple enemy types be more meaningful if they did more damage? Probably, but that doesn't mean that they serve no purpose.
(Click to set source)
No, this has not been the case. You are not always fighting enemies in a large space, but a more restrictive arena, this happens much more frequently then in Breath of the Wild. Running away isn't always a viable option. And you aren't understanding the point that I'm making.I think it was interesting that you mentioned that you could easily run away from enemies. Hasn't this always been the case in 3D games?
The point that I was making is that once you have a good set of weapons, there is little incentive to fight enemies that drop weaker weapons. It makes much more sense to just avoid them and run away when you find them. When a lot of the game is fighting enemies in the overworld, this is not a good thing.
As for the rest about Dungeons there is not much I can say to that, you didn't really say anything that wasn't just a straight opinion.
As for what I want out of Zelda it's not very hard. The core elements of modern 3D Zelda games were defined in Ocarina of Time. Every 3D Zelda game should maintain these core elements, it it doesn't then it has failed.
- Good dungeons. If you don't know what qualifies as a good dungeon, I'll explain. A good dungeon HAS to have a place in the setting of the game. It has to FEEL like it is a unique place in the world with a real purpose. They should be large structures with a set of interconnected rooms. The rooms have to interconnect ORGANICALLY, they cannot just be two puzzle rooms stuck together. A great example of what I would consider a good Dungeon is from Twilight Princess, specifically the Yeti Mansion (which I forget what is called).
- Tools. Things like Bombs, the Deku Leaf, the Beetle. They don't have to be obtained in dungeons, and they don't to have be combat oriented. The tools ideally should not all be obtained at once, and should open up new parts of the world to the player. Progression based on these tools is not necessary but STRONGLY encouraged unless a viable alternative is found.
- Story. Hard to define, I think most people understand what a Zelda-esque story is like by this point. It is not convoluted or complex, it is just a simple mythological story with a slightly more complex theme underpinning it. Wind Waker for example: Good vs Evil and a more complex theme, something like: "The familiar yet stagnating past versus an uncertain yet potentially bold future."
- Music. Same here, you all know what to expect out of Zelda music. Strong melodies, a few recurring themes. Toned down atmospheric tracks for specific areas, bombastic orchestra for other parts .
Anything else is subject to change, though I should say I HATE open world games.
The post was edited 2 times, last by CheckMyDoublesKids ().