David Jaffe sets Twitter on fire after calling Zelda: Tears of the Kingdom “bland and old looking”

giphy.gif


I guess I should stop enjoying TotK.
 
GeekyDad said:
Or...

They spend those resources on making the games fun to play. I'm sure most companies limit budgets on projects. They probably just prioritize theirs differently. It makes the market have nice variety -- a little something for everybody.
Click to expand...
Which has nothing to do with this topic... and proves my point. Not that I disagree though. Games need to be fun/rewarding first. But Nintendo games have always been behind in visuals.

You can have great gameplay and visuals, its not like game devs can't do both.. and are certainly not mutually exclusive.

Like if you released a 360/PS3 looking game today (with occasional PS2/GC textures) by any other AAA dev you'd be laughed and meme'd at much like Halo Infinite was. And that didn't look all that bad.
 
Last edited:
He's not wrong.

It needs to be called out in every review. Imagine if Sony and Microsoft started releasing subpar hardware, and charged 600$ for it 5 years after it released. This babying of Nintendo is ridiculous by the "hardcore" gaming community and publications.

Here everyone was happy to roast Redfall, I want to see the same energy.

I hope the next Nintendo portable is another piece of shit android left over parts console.
 
BbMajor7th said:
He's not wrong. It's just a problem with some franchises - they can't just be good on their own merits and strengths (of which TOTK has plenty), they have to be the absolute best in class in everything, even areas where they're clearly falling behind the competition. You end up getting all these hyperbolic takes and then agitators like Jaffe feel the need to push back.
Click to expand...

Is he really being an agitator here? Is any criticisms of the new Zelda allowed?
 
He's right graphically this game looks like a ps3 game at times. I never got BOTW either and that's ok enjoy what you enjoy. For me I'll pass on it after buying a switch for Zelda and I played maybe a few hours of it to date an now it's a tot for my 8 year old to play some mario games in the car
 
Performance and visuals should knock off a few points. More performance/ fps dips.
The art style is more important than the graphics to me. Nintendo does a great job of that
 
KXVXII9X said:
I'm getting tired of people assuming Zelda games get inflated scores. I was open to criticism with BotW because I thought some were fair, but I have seen a lot of horrible takes and misinformation about TotK. No, it isn't perfect. it has flaws, but it is one of the most impressive games I have played in years due to the gameplay alone. The visuals and performance while not the best, it still offers an aesthetically pleasing experience (especially on OLED) and is much more immersive and livelier than most other open world games I have played. I am finding so many differences between BotW and TotK that I convinced people who still say it is DLC haven't played it or are trolling at this point.
Click to expand...

Not sure if inflated is the right word, but you could never convince me that Zelda doesn't get more leeway with critics and journalists than the average game. I don't think it's that wild of a claim. It's very human to have things you're more bias or fond towards. I can understand TotK's praise, because of the improvements it's made, but the levels of overt positivity with BotW despite it's well known flaws, that still continues from journalists to this day, is sickening. It's funny to now watch so many more people willing to be more open about BotW's failings now that a better version is out. And I don't think it's just because these games are 6 years apart and BotW was perfect for it's time. That game's flaws were well known back in 2017. If you look at many of the "Top Games Ever Made" lists from the past 6 years, you'll find Breath of the Wild as #1 on so many of them. Watch BotW drop like an absolute fucking rock in future Top Games lists in the future, now that Totk is out.

But all that's just my useless opinion.
 
Last edited:
KXVXII9X said:
I'm getting tired of people assuming Zelda games get inflated scores.
Click to expand...
The infamous 8.8 shows this has always been a thing.

A guy lost his job because he refused to give them the curve. Fans went into nuclear meltdown across the internet before normies discovered it because Zelda did not get it's 9+ unanimously.
 
Last edited:
DeepEnigma said:
The infamous 8.8 shows this has always been a thing.

A guy lost his job because he refused to give them the curve. Fans went into nuclear meltdown across the internet before normies discovered it because Zelda did not get it's 9+ unanimously.
Click to expand...

Then there's the infamous Skyward Sword praise.
 
Last edited:
You don't come to Nintendo (or the Switch) for great graphics. Or really even great gameplay. You come for safety and nostalgia.

Hard truth: Nintendo peaked, quality-wise, with the SNES.
 
I can see where people might be turned off by the graphics. The gameplay is king here though, along with the superb art direction, but the anti aliasing with the jaggies and shimmering is the only thing that truly bothers me about the graphics.

If Nintendo updates this game for Switch 2 with an anti aliasing solution, with higher resolution graphics, real time high resolution cut scenes, and a more sturdy frame rate, like the original trailers implied, I won't complain.

Even if Nintendo doesn't do that this game is still a technical marvel for reasons other than graphics. It deserves game of the year.
 
RoboFu said:
Games a 15 / 10 in gameplay.
5 / 10 in graphics

So 15 - 5 = 10 / 10

That better?
Click to expand...
Maybe 15/10 in exploration, but definitely not gameplay. Not terrible, but not great. I'm constantly getting mixed up and swinging the wrong weapon or bringing up the wrong menu as the controls are just not as intuitive as I've come to expect from a modern AAA game.

The building and moving around stuff is often too finicky to get stuff to go where you want and even has camera issues at times.

It's a great game overall, but it also falls short in areas beyond just graphics and performance compared to other big games.
 
From the creator of "Drawn to Death"

The game looks freaking gorgeous at 4K on an emulator. The art and animations are excellent.

Nintendo did what they could with the hardware. I cant think of a better looking open world game on the system.

If you consider that you can go high up in the sky, then ground level then underground with no loadings? Phew
 
DownLikeBCPowder said:
Nintendo games have not "always been behind in visuals". Once the Wii came out? Sure. Before that? No.
Click to expand...
I think three generations is enough when talking about legacy to current console/s. Doesn't really need to be stated that once they given up on the power race they kind of went their own direction. Aka after the Gamecube and going into the Wii era.
 
Last edited:
We should congratulate Nintendo for releasing a game that pushes their hardware to its limit while we are still playing 60fps versions of last gen games. As great as forbidden West looks, the amount of interaction you have with the world itself is a fraction of what you can do in Zelda and that is on mobile phone hardware from 6 years ago. That simply shouldn't be the case. Could you imagine if Zelda was made on for the PS5. The physics would be incredible.
 
mckmas8808 said:
Is he really being an agitator here? Is any criticisms of the new Zelda allowed?
Click to expand...
Oh, 1000% - nothing should be above critique. He is undoubtedly someone who likes to put a cat amongst the pigeons, though - a contrarian. As I say, I think his point is perfectly reasonable and only really a response to the overwhelming praise, not the game itself.
 
Last edited:
DeepEnigma said:
The infamous 8.8 shows this has always been a thing.

A guy lost his job because he refused to give them the curve. Fans went into nuclear meltdown across the internet before normies discovered it because Zelda did not get it's 9+ unanimously.
Click to expand...
I didn't mind some of the critiques, but I think some people's opinions have been a bit hyperbolic. I don't think this game is for everyone, but I think a lot of the asinine opinions are hurting the valid ones.
 
KXVXII9X said:
I didn't mind some of the critiques, but I think some people's opinions have been a bit hyperbolic. I don't think this game is for everyone, but I think a lot of the asinine opinions are hurting the valid ones.
Click to expand...
This happens with almost every high profile game.
 
Madserb2023 said:
We should congratulate Nintendo for releasing a game that pushes their hardware to its limit while we are still playing 60fps versions of last gen games. As great as forbidden West looks, the amount of interaction you have with the world itself is a fraction of what you can do in Zelda and that is on mobile phone hardware from 6 years ago. That simply shouldn't be the case. Could you imagine if Zelda was made on for the PS5. The physics would be incredible.
Click to expand...
This needs challenging. 'Interaction' isn't limited to fire propagation, cutting down trees and the like. Being able to have branching conversations with hundreds of NPCs, alter plot outcomes, join factions, steal items, pick locks, liberate settlements, and myriad other things that major open world games have been doing for decades are all world interaction events. Zelda goes for a totally different form of world interaction that builds on the series heritage. It goes for something different which is both awesome, refreshing and novel. It's not doing 'more' or 'less' merely different.

It's not attempting to simulate whole cities like Novigrad, build interlocking factional narratives like those of Skyrim, or confront you with titanic machines built from dozens of interlocking component parts with elemental strengths and weakness, unique attacks and salvageable materials like Horizon's world.

Zelda stands out because it does something that almost no-one else is attempting and does it very well. I applaud them for it, but the implication that Hyrule has more interaction simply doesn't hold water.
 
Last edited:
The thing I like about Jaffe is he's honest, he'll let you know what he thinks. He's not afraid to get flack. He can love a game and also not love all of it, I know it's a crazy concept but it's something that can happen.

I'm sure ppl will call him "old" or "out of touch" or some other thing to dismiss him... but he has a point, does he not? The gameplay is amazing, he's not talking about the gameplay... he's talking about the way it looks. Why are ppl getting offended by his statement, he's not criticizing you, he's criticizing the games visuals. At that point are you not taking it a little too personal? There are ppl out there having fun with RedFall at 30fps, just like there are ppl who are loving the new Zelda game but are disappointed with the graphics. I've no problem with that. I haven't read any reviews, but if they're saying the other parts of the game are so good that it over shadows it's graphics and any of it's technical shortcomings... I'm cool with that.
 
Said it in the DF thread that when Nintendo comes around with shit like Zelda people start dropping standards they've been chirping about for years. It's strange.
 
Last edited:
twinspectre said:
People disagreed with him when he was talking about modern triple a games being trash, and Indies are the future.
Don't need to quote them, because yall will prove me right when he says stuff about your beloved cinematic experiences :)
Click to expand...
If he said modern AAA games were trash then he wasn't wrong about that, either. Sequel on top of sequel with no fresh ideas. People begging for remakes because they want to play the same thing over and over. Indies at least provide variety over the spate of same game, different story we're seeing from the big publishers. He's also not wrong about TOTK visuals. They're not that great. Clearly Nintendo need new hardware but recycling the BOTW art style to phone in the visuals was 100% Nintendo's choice.
 
[Sigma] said:
Said it in the DF thread that when Nintendo comes around with shit like Zelda people start dropping standards they've been chirping about for years. It's strange.
Click to expand...

When a game is this good in gameplay and design you can overlook a secondary thing like graphics. The bad switch framerate is another matter but the game can be played at 60fps on yuzu with mid tier hardware.

Wonder if God of War did not have those production values, it would be seen just as a repetitive brawler with braindead puzzles.
 
[Sigma] said:
Said it in the DF thread that when Nintendo comes around with shit like Zelda people start dropping standards they've been chirping about for years. It's strange.
Click to expand...
I think when it comes to gameplay, i dont mind it. Its doing things we dont see other AAA devs doing.

However, when it comes to graphics, places like DF simply cannot excuse the awful shimmering which is arguably the worst ive ever seen in a modern game. I have played PS2 era games on my PS3 that didnt have this much shimmering. Its literally lines flowing across my screen.

Level of detail is abysmal even by PS360 era standards. Its probably unfair to compare it to linear games like uncharted but grand theft auto, far cry 3, assassins creed games, etc. looked way better than this in terms of level of detail.

This game looks like those early PS360 era games like Assassins Creed 1, Infamous 1, and Haze. Very very low level of detail, blurred out distant objects and everything running with some of the worst IQ we've seen. The only thing is that devs figured out the hardware by the second game of the series whereas Nintendo has only gotten worse.
 
SlimySnake said:
I think when it comes to gameplay, i dont mind it. Its doing things we dont see other AAA devs doing.

However, when it comes to graphics, places like DF simply cannot excuse the awful shimmering which is arguably the worst ive ever seen in a modern game. I have played PS2 era games on my PS3 that didnt have this much shimmering. Its literally lines flowing across my screen.

Level of detail is abysmal even by PS360 era standards. Its probably unfair to compare it to linear games like uncharted but grand theft auto, far cry 3, assassins creed games, etc. looked way better than this in terms of level of detail.

This game looks like those early PS360 era games like Assassins Creed 1, Infamous 1, and Haze. Very very low level of detail, blurred out distant objects and everything running with some of the worst IQ we've seen. The only thing is that devs figured out the hardware by the second game of the series whereas Nintendo has only gotten worse.
Click to expand...
So why does this game look worse than the one prior?
 
i mean he seems to be mainly talking about graphics, and compared to graphical powerhouses seen on other consoles, he is right.

I also don't care one bit
 
Otre said:
When a game is this good in gameplay and design you can overlook a secondary thing like graphics. The bad switch framerate is another matter but the game can be played at 60fps on yuzu with mid tier hardware.

Wonder if God of War did not have those production values, it would be seen just as a repetitive brawler with braindead puzzles.
Click to expand...

Why do people like you act as if a game looks great, then that means the gameplay is bad?
 
hinch7 said:
I think three generations is enough when talking about legacy to current console/s. Doesn't really need to be stated that once they given up on the power race they kind of went their own direction. Aka after the Gamecube and going into the Wii era.
Click to expand...
I guess if all you're focused on is what's happening today or recently, that might be true. I look at the whole thing because I still play a lot of these older games, but I suppose I get where you're coming from.
 
DeepEnigma said:
So why does this game look worse than the one prior?
Click to expand...
If i had to guess its because of the enhanced physics which has both a CPU and a GPU hit that they had to mitigate by lowering details.

It's also way bigger with massive levels on the sky as well as on the ground. The switch hardware simply cannot handle this.
 
Captain Toad said:
Maybe 15/10 in exploration, but definitely not gameplay. Not terrible, but not great. I'm constantly getting mixed up and swinging the wrong weapon or bringing up the wrong menu as the controls are just not as intuitive as I've come to expect from a modern AAA game.

The building and moving around stuff is often too finicky to get stuff to go where you want and even has camera issues at times.

It's a great game overall, but it also falls short in areas beyond just graphics and performance compared to other big games.
Click to expand...
Explorations is not part of the gameplay he says


The controls work perfect

I suspects you won't have this problem when you git gud
 
Represent. said:
It looks awful. Not to mention sub 720p. And 30fps. (I don't care about 30fps, I actually prefer it. But Redfall got SHIT ON for it)

Idk man, we were crapping on Redfall for how abysmal it looked, and running at 30fps. But not a single reviewer mentions it for this game.
Click to expand...
Difference is that TOTK runs somewhat on crap hardware, Redfall barely runs on vastly superior hardware. TOTK is not a graphical marvel, but you can't expect that when you run it on a potato. Redfall however, runs on powerful hardware and almost looks like a switch game.

Redfall critic is fully justified. Calling TOTK the most beautiful game ever created is hyperbole.
 
I really like TOTK however there is a truth that only Nintendo can get away with charging 70 for this. Right now Starfield is on the examination table being picked through even though we have barely seen footage. If Starfield comes out with 60fps but drops to 50fps it will be yeeted into a volcano.
 
SlimySnake said:
I think when it comes to gameplay, i dont mind it. Its doing things we dont see other AAA devs doing.

However, when it comes to graphics, places like DF simply cannot excuse the awful shimmering which is arguably the worst ive ever seen in a modern game. I have played PS2 era games on my PS3 that didnt have this much shimmering. Its literally lines flowing across my screen.

Level of detail is abysmal even by PS360 era standards. Its probably unfair to compare it to linear games like uncharted but grand theft auto, far cry 3, assassins creed games, etc. looked way better than this in terms of level of detail.

This game looks like those early PS360 era games like Assassins Creed 1, Infamous 1, and Haze. Very very low level of detail, blurred out distant objects and everything running with some of the worst IQ we've seen. The only thing is that devs figured out the hardware by the second game of the series whereas Nintendo has only gotten worse.
Click to expand...
The shimmering has to do with its upscaling. Iirc from the DF analysis of the game they use FSR(1) when docked.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

David Jaffe announces his GOTY 2024!
Social  2 3 4
186
12K
bender replied
Japan Game Awards 2024 - The Legend of Zelda: Tears of the Kingdom Wins the Grand Award
News 
9
1K
Thick Thighs Save Lives replied
No Xenoblade, no Fire Emblem, no Zelda
40
1K
DGrayson replied
Zelda GDC Talk: Evolving Physics and Sounds for Tears of the Kingdom
37
3K
Dorfdad replied
The Legend of Zelda: Tears of the Kingdom released one year ago today
Event  2 3
147
6K
SALMORE replied
Top Bottom