I agree that different is not automatically better. One area where it is in Breath of the Wild though, and the area where I find the game most liberating, is in the lack of explicit handholding.
I won't make arguments for Fi, but just strictly talking dungeon concepts here. Yeah, BOTW does some things better than SS, but I feel that way about most Zelda games, there's always tradeoffs, like I'll enjoy one component of a Zelda more than another, but that other one has components that I enjoy more.
Just finish the game (86 shrines about 60 kokoro seeds, master sword in hand, all memories and divine beast).
The hyrule castle was indeed creepy, felt like a maze somewhat, but which it had some puzzle elements to it though, felt a bit linear outside of finding the path to take. The end battle was really nice!! Though the second transformation was kind of lacking danger if any sort, look epic...but lack feeling of epicness with the easy and simple it is. Wish he had taken a more compact form and have a sword fight with more skill require.
Will keep playing a bit more to find more secrets...but I played for a good 65 hours and they were all great!! Hope the sequel fixes somethings and adds more dungeons and more shrine like puzzles to them.
I'd rather see the moving dungeon beast concept expanded with even bigger moving beasts (which would make it only more impressive) instead of the static standard Zelda dungeons returning.
I honestly don't think they should ever put as much reliance on classical Zelda dungeons again. They've been done to death and are a dead end. Simply because they've been done so well already, that they can hardly surpass their old ones anymore. Just adding new item gimmicks isn't helping, when you still puzzle your way through half the dungeon, get the item, puzzle though the other half, fight the boss and are done. Doubling down on the beasts would likely have the same effect: Been there, done that.
Instead, I'd like them to play around with what is a dungeon and do surprising things.
E.g., instead of a dungeon, make an elaborate enemy occupied fortress through which you can progress by whichever paths you chose (stealth, brute force, using environment to your advantage). Not in the Wind Waker prison island or Gerudo Fortress sense, but in the sense that it's actually a stormable castle if you so chose. Or take Eventide Island and make it a temporary challenge: Get somewhere, get stripped of your equippment and have to survive in the environment.
I honestly don't think they should ever put as much reliance on classical Zelda dungeons again. They've been done to death and are a dead end. Doubling down on the beasts would likely have the same effect: Been there, done that.
E.g., instead of a dungeon, make an elaborate enemy occupied fortress through which you can progress by whichever paths you chose (stealth, brute force, using environment to your advantage).
I'm... good with traditional dungeons instead of something like that, thanks
You can also have dungeons without key hunts. You can do a variety of things with dungeons as this game demonstrates. I just want it to be done a lot better if they're not going to have traditional dungeons.
I feel in general how the beasts/dungeons are integrated into the whole world is better than any Zelda before and as a result the atmosphere only benefited from it. In comparison to past Zelda dungeons these beasts have actual lore and past history with the champions/sages you meet instead of just being abandoned dungeons with no rhyme or reason as to why they exist and are the way they are. It's also absolutely great you can see these things moving constantly as you progress through the main quest or even when you just explore nearby. It greatly enhances the effect of then being inside them and as a result I do not really feel there is any lost atmosphere at all compared to past Zelda games when being instide them. To put it into context the effect is similar to you constantly seeing the Mechonis in Xenoblade Chronicles. The beasts being similarly themed doesn't detract from the experience either because it's grounded in the lore it's based on and as you can see the outside overworld makes this kind of a non-complaint for me.
I'd rather see the moving dungeon beast concept expanded with even bigger moving beasts (which would make it only more impressive) instead of the static standard Zelda dungeons returning.
It comes back to design philosophy - everything has a symmetry, a relationship, with the open world.
I get that some people are looking for more atmosphere, more thematic meat with the shrines, or with the beasts, more layering - I get that - but ultimately the choice was made to bring the player back to the world. That's the real reason why the shrines are these great short pops of flavor, that's the reason why you can look out from atop a divine beast and still see the world moving below you - its all about that connection to the living world.
the dungeons in WW, TP and SS bored me to tears and I hardly remember any of them.
The divine beasts in BOTW are incredibly memorable and and like everything in this game, they are a part of a living, interactive world, you can see them from afar, you learn how they threatedn the people of the realm and you can see the zone you quested in while you board them, it's absolutely spectacular and I loved it. However, I think there should have been 7 of them.
This sentiment is so depressing to read - and it keeps popping up
Classic case of expectations/reality = satisfaction
Divine beasts are objectively masterful design, same with the shrines, but because they are consumed in a manner atypical to classic Zelda dungeons they are apparently shit
They're simply too short and simple. The puzzles weren't interconnected, and some shrines had more depth than half of the beasts. I appreciate the approach chase sections, but some of them (
Rito
) are unbelievably simplistic and underwhelming. I'd they had taken two or three of the unique shrines and wedged them into the beasts.
I get that some people are looking for more atmosphere, more thematic meat with the shrines, or with the beasts, more layering - I get that - but ultimately the choice was made to bring the player back to the world. That's the real reason why the shrines are these great short pops of flavor, that's the reason why you can look out from atop a divine beast and still see the world moving below you - its all about that connection to the living world.
Yep I like all that. Just make them more dense and varied, and we're disco. People aren't complaining about the designs so much as they're criticizing that they're not varied enough.
in fact I don't think anyone is like boohoo, bring back old dungeons! It's more like fans of the old dungeons don't see these as superior, but they could be had more effort been put into them instead of making a world as big as they possibly could.
I honestly don't think they should ever put as much reliance on classical Zelda dungeons again. They've been done to death and are a dead end. Simply because they've been done so well already, that they can hardly surpass their old ones anymore. Just adding new item gimmicks isn't helping, when you still puzzle your way through half the dungeon, get the item, puzzle though the other half, fight the boss and are done. Doubling down on the beasts would likely have the same effect: Been there, done that.
Instead, I'd like them to play around with what is a dungeon and do surprising things.
E.g., instead of a dungeon, make an elaborate enemy occupied fortress through which you can progress by whichever paths you chose (stealth, brute force, using environment to your advantage). Not in the Wind Waker prison island or Gerudo Fortress sense, but in the sense that it's actually a stormable castle if you so chose. Or take Eventide Island and make it a temporary challenge: Get somewhere, get stripped of your equippment and have to survive in the environment.
I don't think expanding the dungeon beast concept in one other Zelda game would feel as "been there, done that". They could make some massive unexplored stuff with them.
Imagine a flying dragon dungeon but triple the size of the bird dungeon. Shit would be mindblowing just seeing it from far away.
I honestly don't think they should ever put as much reliance on classical Zelda dungeons again. They've been done to death and are a dead end. Simply because they've been done so well already, that they can hardly surpass their old ones anymore. Just adding new item gimmicks isn't helping, when you still puzzle your way through half the dungeon, get the item, puzzle though the other half, fight the boss and are done. Doubling down on the beasts would likely have the same effect: Been there, done that.
Instead, I'd like them to play around with what is a dungeon and do surprising things.
E.g., instead of a dungeon, make an elaborate enemy occupied fortress through which you can progress by whichever paths you chose (stealth, brute force, using environment to your advantage). Not in the Wind Waker prison island or Gerudo Fortress sense, but in the sense that it's actually a stormable castle if you so chose. Or take Eventide Island and make it a temporary challenge: Get somewhere, get stripped of your equippment and have to survive in the environment.
I agree. I like the spin on the dungeons this time around a lot. And the shrines are my favorite part of the game. I wouldn't mind if BotW included a classic dungeon or two though. Even if it was in the form of just some cave, ruins, temple, or something that you venture into from the big world. The game is so seamless it wouldn't feel out of place, and variety is always good.
I don't think expanding the dungeon beast concept in another Zelda would feel as "been there, done that". They could make some massive shit with them. Imagine a flying bird dungeon but triple the size or something. Shit would be mindblowing just seeing it from far away.
Smaller world, bigger "dungeons," whatever the next dungeon concept is. Most of the effort in this game went into the world size and trying to impress people with that, which is why I think they even went with this concept in the first place. There's only four and they're pretty short and samey in aesthetics and the bosses are just lazy as fuck. I think that's ass backwards. Like have a big world, sure, but this was needlessly large and I think it took focus away from other things during development.
Smaller world, bigger "dungeons," whatever the next dungeon concept is. Most of the effort in this game went into the world size and trying to impress people with that, which is why I think they even went with this concept in the first place. There's only four and they're pretty short and samey in aesthetics and the bosses are just lazy as fuck. I think that's ass backwards. Like have a big world, sure, but this was needlessly large and I think it took focus away from other things during development.
No, I don't think the world should be much smaller and it doesn't feel like they wanted to impress people with the size as there are a lot of open-world games bigger than this starting with a Nintendo-developed game Xenoblade X.
I don't see the variation complaint. I feel there was plenty of puzzle variety inside of them, only the size was small compared to past 3D Zelda dungeons. Make them bigger and I don't see a problem here.
Better dungeons are definitely my number one wish for a follow up to BotW. I don't think the Divine Beasts are at all bad, but nowhere in this game do you get that wonderful Zelda feeling of solving one gigantic, interconnected puzzle step by step, piece by piece. There might be more dungeoning and puzzling than any other Zelda if you add up every Shrine in the game, but there's nothing you can really sink your teeth into for an extended period of time.
I know we are speaking in generalities here and generally speaking I agree. But , to zoom down a little bit, I'd say that feeling only really applies to a well made Zelda dungeon. There are plenty of dungeons that feel like a series of rooms connected together, with no strong trough line to connect the dots. Even with traditional dungeon structure, there are a lot of types of dungeons, each with their own strengths and weaknesses. I think if we don't watch out, we'll keep referring to this ideal Zelda dungeon that even most traditional Zelda dungeons don't even do.
I know we are speaking in generalities here and generally speaking I agree. But , to zoom down a little bit, I'd say that feeling only really applies to a well made Zelda dungeon. There are plenty of dungeons that feel like a series of rooms connected together, with no strong trough line to connect the dots. Even with traditional dungeon structure, there are a lot of types of dungeons, each with their own strengths and weaknesses. I think if we don't watch out, we'll keep referring to this ideal Zelda dungeon that even most traditional Zelda dungeons don't even do.
Yeah, that's also something I've noticed which is a result of hyperbole. Most of all Zelda dungeons are room after room of either a combat or puzzle scenario. It's way more segmented in the old games as people write it out.
No, I don't think the world should be much smaller and it doesn't feel like they wanted to impress people with the size as there are a lot of open-world games bigger than this starting with a Nintendo-developed game Xenoblade X.
I don't see the variation complaint. I feel there was plenty of puzzle variety inside of them, only the size was small compared to past 3D Zelda dungeons. Make them bigger and I don't see a problem here.
I think people mean lack of variety in dungeon setting, type, tone, atmosphere etc. The shrines differ in puzzles, combat etc., but mostly look the same aesthetically. Same with the Divine Beasts, though they're even samish in terms of puzzles centered around rotating parts of the beast.
Vs. past Zelda games where you got water temples, fire temples, ice temples etc. etc.
One approach isn't better than the other, just different tastes. Those who love exploring the world and weren't big on dungeons are going to be blown away by BOTW. Those who loved the dungeons and just hurried through the overworld to get to them in past games are probably not going to be as blown away and a few may even not like it.
It's a great world, and I'm enjoying the game despite being one who mostly focused on dungeons before and is generally tired of open worlds and just try to traverse to the next mission/quest objective as quickly as possible in most of them. So they have done something special in that I do enjoy exploring this world, though I doubt I'll ever find all the shrines etc. I still prefer the traditional Zelda formula personally though, but my tastes lean more toward linear games.
No, I don't think the world should be much smaller and it doesn't feel like they wanted to impress people with the size as there are a lot of open-world games bigger than this starting with a Nintendo-developed game Xenoblade X.
I didn't think the size of the world here contributed to the game design in any meaningful way. You could take this game, cut it down by even 35-40% and it would still feel absolutely massive for a Zelda game. I just don't see the benefit in making it that big. But I'm not an open world hound, I don't really care about endlessly traversing a bunch of massive fields and canyons and this and that.
Again I don't have a problem with a large open world, but this feels like overkill to me and then some.
I don't see the variation complaint. I feel there was plenty of puzzle variety inside of them, only the size was small compared to past 3D Zelda dungeons. Make them bigger and I don't see a problem here.
I'm talking about the design aesthetics. Yes the innards have different puzzles, but they're thematically the same. There's no thematic variation with the look of them and the same goes for the bosses. The bosses have different attacks and stuff yes, but they're still
Better dungeons are definitely my number one wish for a follow up to BotW. I don't think the Divine Beasts are at all bad, but nowhere in this game do you get that wonderful Zelda feeling of solving one gigantic, interconnected puzzle step by step, piece by piece. There might be more dungeoning and puzzling than any other Zelda if you add up every Shrine in the game, but there's nothing you can really sink your teeth into for an extended period of time.
I disagree with this sentiment completely. In the two dungeons I've done in BotW so far, I have never experienced as much interaction with the dungeons as I have in any Zelda, or in any game ever really.
In both dungeons I have done I am changing the complete shape of the dungeon at will, and using this power to solve puzzles in what is effectively multiple dimensions. I can step outside of the giant dungeon and feel it's still connected to the giant world, and see how I am changing it's shape.
Completely unique for me and never seen anything like it.
I disagree with this sentiment completely. In the two dungeons I've done in BotW so far, I have never experienced as much interaction with the dungeon as I have in Zelda, in any game ever really.
In both dungeons I have done I am changing the complete shape of the dungeon at will, and using this power to solve puzzles in what is effectively multiple dimensions. I can step outside of the giant dungeon and feel it's still connected to the giant world, and see how I am changing it's shape.
Completely unique for me and never seen anything like it.
I actually get what both of you are saying. I think you're both right. It's a funny thing!
It's also why, while I miss the original kind of dungeons, I thought these were unique and still executed well. But I have problems with them in other ways that I think the older dungeons largely succeeded with.
If only we could get a mesh of both, I guess is how most people feel.
The horn on its head. I wouldn't interpret spikes as horns. I've shot it snack dab on the horn three times now. Every time it's been a scale instead. I'm not sure what's going on. Is the first drop ALWAYS a scale or something?
It might still be the hype that's prevalent inside me, but this game has had the unfortunate effect of being so good that I can't look at the older 3D Zeldas in the same way anymore. They may still be in 3D, but they seem so... one-dimensional in comparison to this.
Yeah, that's also something I've noticed which is a result of hyperbole. Most of all Zelda dungeons are room after room of either a combat or puzzle scenario. It's way more segmented in the old games as people write it out.
It might still be the hype that's prevalent inside me, but this game has had the unfortunate effect of being so good that I can't look at the older 3D Zeldas in the same way anymore. They may still be in 3D, but they seem so... one-dimensional in comparison to this.
I still prefer the design focus of those, but yeah this game is definitely great for those who need a seamless gigantic world.
Interestingly, I've seen people criticize the 3D Zeldas for not having the condensed focus of the 2D ones, but now this game makes those feel like 3D versions of the 2D ones, only bigger with a hub area.
I think people mean lack of variety in dungeon setting, type, tone, atmosphere etc. The shrines differ in puzzles, combat etc., but mostly look the same aesthetically. Same with the Divine Beasts, though they're even samish in terms of puzzles centered around rotating parts of the beast.
Vs. past Zelda games where you got water temples, fire temples, ice temples etc. etc.
One approach isn't better than the other, just different tastes. Those who love exploring the world and weren't big on dungeons are going to be blown away by BOTW. Those who loved the dungeons and just hurried through the overworld to get to them in past games are probably not going to be as blown away and a few may even not like it.
It's a great world, and I'm enjoying the game despite being one who mostly focused on dungeons before and is generally tired of open worlds and just try to traverse to the next mission/quest objective as quickly as possible in most of them. So they have done something special in that I do enjoy exploring this world, though I doubt I'll ever find all the shrines etc. I still prefer the traditional Zelda formula personally though, but my tastes lean more toward linear games.
I didn't think the size of the world here contributed to the game design in any meaningful way. You could take this game, cut it down by even 35-40% and it would still feel absolutely massive for a Zelda game. I just don't see the benefit in making it that big. But I'm not an open world hound, I don't really care about endlessly traversing a bunch of massive fields and canyons and this and that.
Again I don't have a problem with a large open world, but this feels like overkill to me and then some.
It obviously contributes to the game design. Exploration is the key aspect of this game and you need space for that to become rewarding and something special. The climbing and gliding loop would also be extremely restricted as a result.
More importantly, Zelda is the series where the open-world atmosphere is extremely fitting. No matter what objective you tackle in the game feels like an adventure which is the ultimate Zelda spirit everyone wanted for years. A big open-world makes this a realistic scenario.
I'm talking about the design aesthetics. Yes the innards have different puzzles, but they're thematically the same. There's no thematic variation with the look of them and the same goes for the bosses. The bosses have different attacks and stuff yes, but they're still
I explained this earlier but them being thematically the same doesn't really feel like a solid complaint. Not only does it make sense within the lore created around the divine beasts, it's a dungeon that is existing inside the wide open-world. That you can see the outside makes this a non-issue for me.
I explained this earlier but them being thematically the same doesn't really feel like a solid complaint. Not only does it make sense within the lore created around the divine beasts, it's a dungeon that is existing inside the wide open-world. That you can see the outside makes this a non-issue for me.
It may not be a solid complaint to you as you personally had no problem with it. That's fine. It was repetitive to me. Had there been other varied dungeons between these, and if these were kind of like "super" or challenging dungeons (
as doing them contributes to weakening Ganon, having the Blight Ganons be difficult superbosses would've been awesome
) that'd have been different. As the only offerings apart from shrines, it didn't completely satisfy me.
One thing I wish the game had more of is discoverable lore.
Take the
Forgotten Temple
for example. This large old abandoned structure, with
damaged guardians and a giant goddess statue at the end
, yet all you get is a spirit orb. Nothing about the location aside from the name and the room the shrine is in. There could have been wall inscribings or old texts or tablets or something that gave more meat to the location by revealing some of its history.
In a game where your reward for almost everything is a spirit orb or korok seed, with occasional pieces of armor, expanded lore for all the ruins and destroyed villages could have helped add variety and accentuate rewards. Something like a central library with researchers trying to piece together pre-calamity history, and you helping them find out about different locations, would have been awesome.
that's disappointing. I mean does he even interact with you in some way? Although I haven't got that far yet, I get the impression he's just another creature for you to beat in the game like so many others without any build up or pay off?
I still prefer the design focus of those, but yeah this game is definitely great for those who need a seamless gigantic world.
Interestingly, I've seen people criticize the 3D Zeldas for not having the condensed focus of the 2D ones, but now this game makes those feel like 3D versions of the 2D ones, only bigger with a hub area.
Yeah. To me it feels the shrines were implemented in order to beat deadlines, or because internally they just got sick of the formula (I suspect the former but still a cool solution to the problem). Like they had all these individual puzzles thought out and ready to be textured to match the themes of a traditional Zelda dungeon, but then saw the deadline approaching and came up with the shrine solution as a workaround.
Shrines are my favorite part of the game since the puzzles are great, but from an art direction perspective I would say it's the most creatively bankrupt part of the game.
that's disappointing. I mean does he even interact with you in some way? Although I haven't got that far yet, I get the impression he's just another creature for you to beat in the game like so many others without any build up or pay off?
Yeah. To me it feels the shrines were implemented in order to beat deadlines, or because internally they just got sick of the formula (I suspect the former but still a cool solution to the problem). Like they had all these individual puzzles thought out and ready to be textured to match the themes of a traditional Zelda dungeon, but then saw the deadline approaching and came up with the shrine solution as a workaround.
Shrines are my favorite part of the game since the puzzles are great, but from an art direction perspective I would say it's the most creatively bankrupt part of the game.
Right, that's how I feel as well. Like so much of the effort went into making as huge a world as possible and I think it impacted the usual creativity and variation of the dungeons. As far as I can recall, they got individual developers to design a short puzzle and did them that way. They were mostly pretty fun, but neither the shrines or beasts gave me the same sense of satisfaction and it felt lazy as you said.
That's why I'm suggesting a smaller world-- it didn't need to be that big at all, especially where it may have taken away from other aspects which I personally find to be the more enticing elements of the series. I don't really like Zelda to get lost in a world that big. I like an overworld sure, it can be big, just make it tighter and have better dungeons.
It obviously contributes to the game design. Exploration is the key aspect of this game and you need space for that to become rewarding and something special. The climbing and gliding loop would also be extremely restricted as a result.
More importantly, Zelda is the series where the open-world atmosphere is extremely fitting. No matter what objective you tackle in the game feels like an adventure which is the ultimate Zelda spirit everyone wanted for years. A big open-world makes this a realistic scenario.
I explained this earlier but them being thematically the same doesn't really feel like a solid complaint. Not only does it make sense within the lore created around the divine beasts, it's a dungeon that is existing inside the wide open-world. That you can see the outside makes this a non-issue for me.
Compare how Hyrule castle fits into the world with how the shrines/dungeons are separate from it (because of the super powerful traversal powers of Link).
I want dungeons that fit into the world more like Hyrule castle, but have the content more of a shrine, but not completely of a shrine.
Consider how every dungeon has the same enemies and has a boss that, imo, comes across as non-iconic and lacking in mechanics. Perhaps obvious pattern/weakness bosses were a good thing to move on from, but I don't think what they've replaced them with is better (and is in fact at its best when it reverts to the old pattern).
They also have the same runes and same "move the dungeon" mechanic, whereas in other Zeldas the individual conceits and gadgets of dungeons were more distinct.
Consider how every dungeon is about 2-3 shrines in length. Compared to the extensive overworld time, that feels woefully short. There are only four of them. Give me 8-10. Like a LoZ or aLttP.
Beyond that, the Divine Beasts' relationship to Ganon is just bad. No way I'm not going to do the dungeons in a Zelda and then I get a pretty lame Ganon fight as a reward.
Perhaps none of these things matter to you, but I think there are plenty of good areas for concern with these dungeons.
One thing I wish the game had more of is discoverable lore.
Take the
Forgotten Temple
for example. This large old abandoned structure, with
damaged guardians and a giant goddess statue at the end
, yet all you get is a spirit orb. Nothing about the location aside from the name and the room the shrine is in. There could have been wall inscribings or old texts or tablets or something that gave more meat to the location by revealing some of its history.
In a game where your reward for almost everything is a spirit orb or korok seed, with occasional pieces of armor, expanded lore for all the ruins and destroyed villages could have helped add variety and accentuate rewards. Something like a central library with researchers trying to piece together pre-calamity history, and you helping them find out about different locations, would have been awesome.
Yeah. To me it feels the shrines were implemented in order to beat deadlines, or because internally they just got sick of the formula (I suspect the former but still a cool solution to the problem). Like they had all these individual puzzles thought out and ready to be textured to match the themes of a traditional Zelda dungeon, but then saw the deadline approaching and came up with the shrine solution as a workaround.
Shrines are my favorite part of the game since the puzzles are great, but from an art direction perspective I would say it's the most creatively bankrupt part of the game.
I doubt it. Pretty sure shrines would have been an actual concept to drive the player to have something major to explore the world for -- finding things that upgrade your hearts/stamina that then further help you find more of that same thing is a solid gameplay loop. And is part of why this game's exploration feels rewarding (beyond just the journey itself).
