Comparing Horizon Zero Dawn and TLoZ: BoTW

Status
Not open for further replies.
From what we've seen the game has plenty of weight in the attacks themselves, when you get hit or when enemies get hit. Even graphical effects showcase impact and it's great:

I'm not seeing it.

The TGA footage already has enemies with nice movesets not far removed at all from Souls games with leaping attacks, usual melee attacks and even better some good AI. I'm not sure what there is to compare to Souls bosses yet because one game is already out and can be judged while the other has only shown little snippets of its game and exactly zero bosses.

Enemies with leaping attacks is something pretty much every melee game has (including plenty of past Zeldas).

Zelda has never had an full open-world, like that going to change now. Also, the Zelda combat system was never bad, hell the Souls games straight-up copied the OoT combat system.

Overworlds to explore are staples in Zelda. As far as the overworld goes, they're just making the empty fields even larger than they were before.

Yes, context and implementation is everything. Just because one game has a bad open-world doesn't mean being open-world is bad.

I was talking about weapon durability and the role it played in combat in Sticker Star.

It's going to play that same role in Zelda.
 
Is there an explanation as to why "Aloy" Magic hacking stick disappears when she put it in the invisible quiver? She attacks the watcher and the damn thing appears out of nowhere and she puts it away and it disappears. Is this a bug or some kind of magic.

I just assumed it was the bow transformed and didn't pay it much attention. Though I've not watched any Horizon gameplay in awhile, so It might just disappear, if so hopefully it's fixed by release.
Edit: Also, it's definitely not magic, I remember GG saying there's no magic, it's all tech based.
 
And that was a horrible idea on their part. The durability system in the alpha was great. It actively encouraged me to try new weapons and tactics. I loved it.

Eh, it definitely needed work. I would have liked to see it improved upon, but given the state it was in versus its total removal, I don't mind the latter.

I just assumed it was the bow transformed and didn't pay it much attention. Though I've not watched any Horizon gameplay in awhile, so It might just disappear, if so hopefully it's fixed by release.
Edit: Also, it's definitely not magic, I remember GG saying there's no magic, it's all tech based.

Yeah, they emphasized that it's sci-fi, not fantasy.
 
I'm not seeing it.

Ok.

Enemies with leaping attacks is something pretty much every melee game has (including plenty of past Zeldas).

Guess what, it's like the enemy movesets weren't that bad for past Zelda games after all!

Overworlds to explore are staples in Zelda. As far as the overworld goes, they're just making the empty fields even larger than they were before.

Overworlds, not true open-worlds. Wind Waker is the only one with an "open-world" and even then it's just levels seperated by water. Your last sentence was predictable.
I was talking about weapon durability and the role it played in combat in Sticker Star.

It's going to play that same role in Zelda.

You won't be able to, though, because it's going to play out completely differently. Meaningful progression is a good thing which one of Sticker Star's biggest problems is as you always get the same 2-3 stickers over and over again throughout the game.

Which is not at all the case with Breat of the Wild as the variety is far greater and same weapons can even have more damage power!
 
Guess what, it's like the enemy movesets weren't that bad for past Zelda games after all!

They're forgettable and useless to memorize. That's pretty bad e.g. there's no point in knowing the movesets to the knights in Wind Waker. Put your shield up and wait for parry attempts. That's not true in the Souls games.

Overworlds, not true open-worlds. Wind Waker is the only one with an "open-world" and even then it's just levels seperated by water. Your last sentence was predictable.

BotW's open world is just an extension of what was already there. It's just bigger.


You won't be able to, though, because it's going to play out completely differently. Meaningful progression is a good thing which one of Sticker Star's biggest problems is as you always get the same 2-3 stickers over and over again throughout the game.

Which is not at all the case with Breat of the Wild as the variety is far greater and same weapons can even have more damage power!

See a past post of mine why progression in the game is not an excuse to explore every inch or engage the enemies.
 
I just assumed it was the bow transformed and didn't pay it much attention. Though I've not watched any Horizon gameplay in awhile, so It might just disappear, if so hopefully it's fixed by release.
Edit: Also, it's definitely not magic, I remember GG saying there's no magic, it's all tech based.

OK, I just watched the PRO Trailer, and you're right, it is the Bow that transform into a Staff. The only problem is that when she stabs the watcher in the Pro trailer the Bow is on her back.

time stamped
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lwI6-jKlsO0&t=1m31s

and at the 2:41 mark she puts the staff in her invisible quiver and it disappears
 
They're forgettable and useless to memorize. That's pretty bad e.g. there's no point in knowing the movesets to the knights in Wind Waker. Put your shield up and wait for parry attempts. That's not true in the Souls games.

That's literally only true for Wind Waker because it's the only game with an OP parry mechanic. Knowing the movesets for e.g. the Darknuts in OoT, MM, lots of enemies in Skyward Sword and to a lesser extent TP is essential. The movesets were never a problem with enemies from Zelda. Damage output, enemy variety and just generally the difficulty were the "problem". And again, combat was never bad. The elements were always there, Nintendo just chose to make the game accessible and rather easy.

BotW's open world is just an extension of what was already there. It's just bigger.

No, there is a clear difference between an open-world and an linear overworlds with loading screens and simple segregated areas. No Zelda game other than the 2D games and maybe Wind Waker were called open-world and there is a reason for that.

See a past post of mine why progression in the game is not an excuse to explore every inch or engage the enemies.

I'm not seeing one that explains that at all.
 
They're forgettable and useless to memorize. That's pretty bad e.g. there's no point in knowing the movesets to the knights in Wind Waker. Put your shield up and wait for parry attempts. That's not true in the Souls games.



BotW's open world is just an extension of what was already there. It's just bigger.




See a past post of mine why progression in the game is not an excuse to explore every inch or engage the enemies.

Ive been reading your posts and all they are is reducto ad absurdum fallacies. You keep reducing the mechanics of Zelda to a caricature and that doesn't represent the reality of what Nintendo is making. It's fine if you don't like it, just stop making crappy arguments about it
 
Great OP. I look forward to both of these games as they look amazing in their own right. I never thought to compare the two like you did but Horizon could be Sony's Zelda franchise.
 
If you look back to any Zelda game all you ever needed was the sword, bow/boomerang, and a shield. That was largely it. It didn't matter how you tackled enemies or what weapon you used for the most part except a select few enemies. Though darknuts in Wind Waker were easy and you could use a boomerang and bow to get rid of their armor faster, and to stun them.

I do like that there are a variety of weapons they want you to use to tackle enemies. As shown in the TGA gameplay footage a fast melee weapon was good for lizalfos, a big heavy one would have been too slow, but that big heavy one is perfect for bigger enemies like that moblin with his club. I don't believe you'll have much issue obtaining lots of weapons as even some enemies can be weapons themselves (stal bokoblin) and they all drop a lot of weapons. I have no doubt there will be repair shops and ways for you to buy unique weapons as well.

It's open world so finding the balance in breakable weapons and obtaining weapons is key for Nintendo, and so far from what we've seen in all the gameplay footage we've never seen Link without a weapon.

You can also use your key items that you get from the mini dungeons as a weapon too like the magnet as well as physics based ways like rolling a boulder over, or heck cutting down a tree and have it fall on top of them or roll over the edge.

I don't mind if it's been done before in some form or another, it's exciting for me personally because it's being done in Zelda and doing a lot of things within the game that finally breaking free from the OoT ways.

However, one exciting thing people do seem to like is the OoT/3D way of handling and approaching enemies, and interacting with them and damage output. The waiting and tension during combat does seem to be there in the new Zelda, and damage output is considerably higher than past titles. Example from OoT3D on damage output: An iron knuckle in Master Quest will deal 8 hearts to you, meaning if you have 16 hearts, 2 hits will kill you. The new Zelda looks like Master Quest as a standard as seen by lizalfos doing 8 hearts of damage and that has me and a lot of people excited for the difficulty spikes during combat. It makes how you approach things more important especially if there are groups.

We also see the enemies interact with the world around them and with you. In E3 footage we see how the AI interacts with the world with bokoblins lighting their clubs on fire if there's a source of fire nearby and picking up items or rocks to throw at you. They will also chase around animals for food not waiting around for you to attack them. They have a life doing their own thing without you. And of course, boss type enemies will have the most tension looking for ways to approach and waiting to counter like steppe talus, the moblin in the shrine, and the guardians that can be found in fields and chase after you. Though interestingly, lizalfos seem to have lost their miniboss-like status and look to be more common enemies seen in the jungle spaced out and in groups, but they didn't seem to lose what makes fighting them so great to fight as a miniboss type enemy.

Another point to be made is the world design, and the TGA footage showing thought in looking around you, turning the area into a puzzle to find the shrine thanks to the bard and his rhymes. Giving you only a couple of key phrases and little else. They searched around the jungle and found the head of a serpent, following the direction it was facing, Bill, came to a clearing on a hill. The hill could be a vantage point to look around you and it also introduces you to your first lizalfos fight. From there you might be able to see something in the distance and come across what looks like an ancient ruin and even more lizalfos, meaning you're going the right way. Then they head in deeper and come across the shrine and get ambushed by lizalfos and a moblin inside protecting the shrine. There's clear thought in this and requires something out of you to find the shrine. they even showed 2 different approaches in the video like head on and stealth, navigating the area that helps to your advantage in these fights. And I love that!



I'm excited for Zelda. I'm excited for Horizon. But let's also not be reductionist when it comes to either one.

That's literally only true for Wind Waker because it's the only game with an OP parry mechanic. Knowing the movesets for e.g. the Darknuts in OoT, MM, lots of enemies in Skyward Sword and to a lesser extent TP is essential. The movesets were never a problem with enemies from Zelda. Damage output, enemy variety and just generally the difficulty were the "problem". And again, combat was never bad. The elements were always there, Nintendo just chose to make the game accessible and rather easy.

Yeah, and I believe the lack of big damage in most of these games reduced the tension and desire to wait most of the time. You always felt pretty OP. To get more tension out of Wind Waker I played it in Hero Mode and it was great. I think SS was the game that I really loved for its combat, tension and how you tackle enemies. It is slower than previous Zelda games, but there are good reasons behind it with general motion controls and how the enemies are focused on your movement and how you interact them them. It feels great to beat the enemies in Skyward Sword. Normally there are few enemy types that really allow for this style of combat but in SS I felt it throughout the game and with a variety of enemies. I still like SS despite what others may think of the game.

TP, despite having better combat you still feel pretty OP and darknuts feel like the only big threat. Unless you play on Hero Mode.

But you are right, that style of combat has always been there, it's just that the damage output hasn't provided the tension or necessary feedback to the player to really dive into it and feel it all out in a deeper way, I think.

Probably why some will comment about Dark Souls and OoT so often when it comes to the combat and the strong feeling of tension. BotW seems to be bringing a lot of that tension back and make you care about your own life again. You're not OP anymore.
 
Have you ever played a souls game? Or Let It Die?

Souls games you tend to pick a weapon and stick with it because of the general scarcity of high end upgrade materials you want to know what weapon or weapons you're going to be using, In 2 they made durability somewhat punishing but it was still fairly easy to go from bonfire to bonfire without breaking a weapon (unless you were on pc then enjoy your double durability loss lol). That change was reverted in bloodborne and 3 and neither of those titles have fast durability loss.

You haven't even played the fucking game we're talking about and keep projecting shit like "the combat is bad and there's no reason to engage with enemies," (when so far there is a shit ton of valid reasons seen in game like crafting items being dropped and ofc more loot, because you played a game that you think is similar, which would be hilarious if it wasn't so grating.

But you know exactly how things are going to evolve over the course of the game and that's not projecting.
 
And the fact that this is a game with Zelda in its name will have zero biases towards it.
The Zelda fans ITT are being a lot less insecure and disengenous with their posts.
Why would one wonder about that unless one had a mental defect? You predict future performance based on the information available including past performance. Zelda has never had good combat. In the hours of footage shown, that doesn't look like it's going to change. It's probably going to be bad in BotW too.
Zelda has always had good combat, it's simple and has always got the job done. Not to mention the oh so small fact that Zelda invented lock on mechanics. -_-

Say that you do get a weapon that never degrades and can be upgraded so it's useful for the rest of the game.

Then still, what's the use in engaging fodder enemies for weapons with shit durability? There's no point.
Again, you're making a lot of assumptions, you aren't getting the master sword right off the bat. Nor are you getting craftables for free, stop ignoring the shit ton of valid reasons to engage in combat.
 
If you look back to any Zelda game all you ever needed was the sword, bow/boomerang, and a shield. That was largely it. It didn't matter how you tackled enemies or what weapon you used for the most part except a select few enemies. Though darknuts in Wind Waker were easy and you could use a boomerang and bow to get rid of their armor faster, and to stun them.

I do like that there are a variety of weapons they want you to use to tackle enemies. As shown in the TGA gameplay footage a fast melee weapon was good for lizalfos, a big heavy one would have been too slow, but that big heavy one is perfect for bigger enemies like that moblin with his club. I don't believe you'll have much issue obtaining lots of weapons as even some enemies can be weapons themselves (stal bokoblin) and they all drop a lot of weapons. I have no doubt there will be repair shops and ways for you to buy unique weapons as well.

It's open world so finding the balance in breakable weapons and obtaining weapons is key for Nintendo, and so far from what we've seen in all the gameplay footage we've never seen Link without a weapon.

You can also use your key items that you get from the mini dungeons as a weapon too like the magnet as well as physics based ways like rolling a boulder over, or heck cutting down a tree and have it fall on top of them or roll over the edge.

I don't mind if it's been done before in some form or another, it's exciting for me personally because it's being done in Zelda and doing a lot of things within the game that finally breaking free from the OoT ways.

However, one exciting thing people do seem to like is the OoT/3D way of handling and approaching enemies, and interacting with them and damage output. The waiting and tension during combat does seem to be there in the new Zelda, and damage output is considerably higher than past titles. Example from OoT3D on damage output: An iron knuckle in Master Quest will deal 8 hearts to you, meaning if you have 16 hearts, 2 hits will kill you. The new Zelda looks like Master Quest as a standard as seen by lizalfos doing 8 hearts of damage and that has me and a lot of people excited for the difficulty spikes during combat. It makes how you approach things more important especially if there are groups.

We also see the enemies interact with the world around them and with you. In E3 footage we see how the AI interacts with the world with bokoblins lighting their clubs on fire if there's a source of fire nearby and picking up items or rocks to throw at you. They will also chase around animals for food not waiting around for you to attack them. They have a life doing their own thing without you. And of course, boss type enemies will have the most tension looking for ways to approach and waiting to counter like steppe talus, the moblin in the shrine, and the guardians that can be found in fields and chase after you. Though interestingly, lizalfos seem to have lost their miniboss-like status and look to be more common enemies seen in the jungle spaced out and in groups, but they didn't seem to lose what makes fighting them so great to fight as a miniboss type enemy.

Another point to be made is the world design, and the TGA footage showing thought in looking around you, turning the area into a puzzle to find the shrine thanks to the bard and his rhymes. Giving you only a couple of key phrases and little else. They searched around the jungle and found the head of a serpent, following the direction it was facing, Bill, came to a clearing on a hill. The hill could be a vantage point to look around you and it also introduces you to your first lizalfos fight. From there you might be able to see something in the distance and come across what looks like an ancient ruin and even more lizalfos, meaning you're going the right way. Then they head in deeper and come across the shrine and get ambushed by lizalfos and a moblin inside protecting the shrine. There's clear thought in this and requires something out of you to find the shrine. they even showed 2 different approaches in the video like head on and stealth, navigating the area that helps to your advantage in these fights. And I love that!



I'm excited for Zelda. I'm excited for Horizon. But let's also not be reductionist when it comes to either one.



Yeah, and I believe the lack of big damage in most of these games reduced the tension and desire to wait most of the time. You always felt pretty OP. To get more tension out of Wind Waker I played it in Hero Mode and it was great. I think SS was the game that I really loved for its combat, tension and how you tackle enemies. It is slower than previous Zelda games, but there are good reasons behind it with general motion controls and how the enemies are focused on your movement and how you interact them them. It feels great to beat the enemies in Skyward Sword. Normally there are few enemy types that really allow for this style of combat but in SS I felt it throughout the game and with a variety of enemies. I still like SS despite what others may think of the game.

TP, despite having better combat you still feel pretty OP and darknuts feel like the only big threat. Unless you play on Hero Mode.

But you are right, that style of combat has always been there, it's just that the damage output hasn't provided the tension or necessary feedback to the player to really dive into it and feel it all out in a deeper way, I think.

Probably why some will comment about Dark Souls and OoT so often when it comes to the combat and the strong feeling of tension. BotW seems to be bringing a lot of that tension back and make you care about your own life again. You're not OP anymore.

Yeah. Good post. I'm dubious of open world design and what it might do to my dungeons, gadgets, and puzzles, but I don't think BotW is being ill-thought out or won't offer something to the genre. It might not end up being what I want from Zelda, but I'm pretty sure it'll be a good game.
 
But you know exactly how things are going to evolve over the course of the game and that's not projecting.
There's explicit evidence for my claims both from the words of Nintendo themselves, item descriptions, recent demos, etc. but ok. I mean the dude's straight up pretending that Nintendo hasn't learned a single thing based on feedback from previous games. For instance at the top of the page he's calling the fields empty, yet based on both the showings this year, the game while it has huge environments is more dense than Skyward Sword in terms of things that you can find and encounter, likely in response to the criticism of OoT and TP for having relatively empty fields. Basically he seemingly doesn't know jack shit about BOTW at all and thus is bitching about the preconceived notions that came from his ass, "the game has bad combat because I played sticker star." Like how are you supposed to respond to that?
 
We have literally hours of gameplay footage from the E3 demo and a snippet from the TGA demo showing us the extensive gameplay systems of a percentage of BotW, it's fine to not be excited for it, but being reductionist about the new content is just unwarranted pessimism.

BotW looks like it's embracing more modern design philosophies while reembracing the open and adventurous feel of the very first entry, which is something they've stated very explicitly and a sentiment shared by people who played the actual demo. For instance, in the TGA demo, we're given a hint to a secret shrine through word of mouth from an NPC and not by an instant marker on a minimap. That's just one example out of what may be many in the final game.

I'll always be cautiously optimistic concerning Zelda, since there's plenty of ways they could mess up, but I have faith from what I see, it seems like they took the criticisms of past Zelda entries to heart. :)
 
We have literally hours of gameplay footage from the E3 demo and a snippet from the TGA demo showing us the extensive gameplay systems of a percentage of BotW, it's fine to not be excited for it, but being reductionist about the new content is just unwarranted pessimism.

BotW looks like it's embracing more modern design philosophies while reembracing the open and adventurous feel of the very first entry, which is something they've stated very explicitly and a sentiment shared by people who played the actual demo. For instance, in the TGA demo, we're given a hint to a secret shrine through word of mouth from an NPC and not by an instant marker on a minimap. That's just one example out of what may be many in the final game.

I'll always be cautiously optimistic concerning Zelda, since there's plenty of ways they could mess up, but I have faith from what I see, it seems like they took the criticisms of past Zelda entries to heart. :)

Always do, for better and for worse, but seriously they are awesome about that.
 
Eh, it definitely needed work. I would have liked to see it improved upon, but given the state it was in versus its total removal, I don't mind the latter.

I genuinely loved it in the alpha. I guess I would have been fine with some refinements, but removing it altogether sucks.

Nioh is still a day one purchase for me though!
 
Great OP. I look forward to both of these games as they look amazing in their own right. I never thought to compare the two like you did but Horizon could be Sony's Zelda franchise.

I wouldn't say that Horizon is going to be Sony's "Zelda", in fact I don't think Sony even has something like Zelda, the only game series that I've seen evoke modern Zelda more thoroughly really is just Darksiders 1, Alundra and Owlboy to a more minor extent. There are many games that carry "feelings" of the series, like Souls evoking the first game but generally following a single element such as combat. Few if any series try to mix explicit puzzle solving, exploration and combat in the way the Zelda games excel at. Zelda tries to be above the average of every general gameplay genre standard and its a weighty task to do. This is generally why it's so easy to poke holes at the mistakes in the games. They're trying to do so much from a varied gameplay standpoint rather than simply refine one or two aspects to a higher degree in the genre (which is what modern Tomb Raider also tried its hand at albeit more problematically).

I think the most obvious points of comparisons is how Zelda and Horizon handle combat and how they handle everything else, Horizon's combat is more likely to be more thrilling overall because that was the major focus of the developer, if they didn't succeed the game would probably not offer anything from a gameplay standpoint as all its other systems are seemingly quite simplistic to foster this focus in design.

Zelda on the other hand has more complexity in its mechanics across the board (aside for combat) which makes it clear that Zelda like its 3D predecessors is deliberately trying to accomplish more than just combat mixed with exploration. It's trying to inject a good level of relevant nuance into everything that the player can do which is a tall order from a game design perspective for how many actions the player has in this Sandbox. It's going to lead to more scattershot design that's inevitable, but the trick is to curbing that curve in player power level to a reasonable level so that there is challenge and complexity throughout. MGSV's 1st main mission is great example of how these sandbox elements are complementary, but the later unlocks spiral into how overpowered Snake can actually become which is only really alleviated by a challenge run.

I only really did this comparison so that I could gain more insight into both games and how the mechanics reinforce different designs that are both explicit and more subtle (Zelda likely leaning more towards Hybrid combat design while Horizon being much more Ranged oriented I feel is one aspect that can only be observed through comparison). There wasn't really any intention to proclaim Horizon as Sony's "Zelda".
 
I genuinely loved it in the alpha. I guess I would have been fine with some refinements, but removing it altogether sucks.

Nioh is still a day one purchase for me though!

Not when different weapon drops already had such randomness in their attributes and rolls attached to them, particularly when you consider some weapons might drop with a stat scaling affix or something like that making certain rolls important to specific builds. Having weapons destroy themselves breaks your ability to really build a character around something like that.
Not to mention your ability to rank up in katana high skills or mid skill etc etc, then all you get is pikes and you just feel bad?

Truth is Nioh has multiple systems that promote specialization that directly conflict with an aggressive durability system.
 
Not when different weapon drops already had such randomness in their attributes and rolls attached to them, particularly when you consider some weapons might drop with a stat scaling affix or something like that making certain rolls important to specific builds. Having weapons destroy themselves breaks your ability to really build a character around something like that.
Not to mention your ability to rank up in katana high skills or mid skill etc etc, then all you get is pikes and you just feel bad?

Truth is Nioh has multiple systems that promote specialization that directly conflict with an aggressive durability system.

Then Zelda has it right most likely. By removing the need for creating "builds" like in most RPGs, the aggressive durability acts as a strategic mechanic that informs the decisions of the player for what weapons to use and where which is then given greater complexity as different enemies are better taken out with different kinds of weapons (as shown by the Lizalfos and the Moblins). The game gives access to essentially Link's entire moveset when you get off the plateau barring elemental and other special property weapons (that aren't the fire rod). In addition, the potential double damage from the throw mechanic which can be used by the player to actively make decisions and mistakes which gives more satisfying agency. It's also worth noting that the sparks that fly out from breaking Weapons in Zelda seems to be much more eventful than other games which lends it impact in some way either by being satisfying or shocking. It's clearly a core mechanic so the amount of thought put into it is nicely done it seems.

It seems mixing durability with RPG stats is the key issue in addition to repairing. Builds are all about reliability, durability is about unpredictability and they directly conflict by nature.
 
Truth be told, in 5-10 years only one of these games will be remembered and talked about.

It's interesting that you say that. I actually think Horizon will be a more memorable title of the two. Earlier versions of Zelda will be more memorable simply because this is really Nintendo's first open world game and by all accounts they didn't bring in developers that have actually worked on successful open world games where GG did.
 
It's interesting that you say that. I actually think Horizon will be a more memorable title of the two. Earlier versions of Zelda will be more memorable simply because this is really Nintendo's first open world game and by all accounts they didn't bring in developers that have actually worked on successful open world games where GG did.

Er, they have Monolith Soft right next door (who is confirmed to be working on the project to a degree) who made XCX which is arguably one of the best designed Open worlds since Morrowind. Amazingly satisfying to traverse that game.
 
Because it's the early game, progression, how does it work? It's almost like if enemies get stronger, then their weapons that we can steal will too? Seems like it's too complicated for you to figure that out? Fuck it, stay away from Let It Die dude. Don't want you shitting up the OT with "what's the point of fodder in an RPG?"

EDIT:Oh wait it's a ps4 exclusive so i'm sure you'll praise it to high heavens based on that fact alone.

No I don't praise all PS4 exclusives like you do every single Ubisoft game.

It's mechanic I'm not fond of no matter the game. That doesn't mean I won't play a game that has it. Games where you can repair damage like Bloodborne or The Witcher 3 are tolerable. Shit just breaking and being lost forever sucks.
 
No I don't praise all PS4 exclusives like you do every single Ubisoft game.

It's mechanic I'm not fond of no matter the game. That doesn't mean I won't play a game that has it. Games where you can repair damage like Bloodborne or The Witcher 3 are tolerable. Shit just breaking and being lost forever sucks.

who's to say we wont be able to restore a a weapon/armor's durability or even enhance it? Cooking and alchemy are already confirmed and it's not a huge logical leap to think smithing will be present. Just on the plateau area we've seen examples of shields that last way way longer than others and enhanced broadswords in chests that never presented a 'badly damaged' warning despite being used extensively by the player. Also worth noting that the nature of usage seems to heavily dictate item degredation: slam a sword against a huge rock monster and you wont have that sword for long as opposed to cutting through foliage or slicing up some fat fleshy foes.

Clearly random crap like a run-of-the-mill woodcutter's axe or bokoblin club would not be a target for restoration. They're intended for limited functional and situational use before maybe being chucked at a dudes face for some sweet damage, but in general I like that most all items that you can wear or wield in this game have durability, all the way down to twigs and leaves. It provides a nice steady loop of looting for all manner of things and not being at all hesitant in using them right away toward short term goals knowing you'll never be too far from some more basic supplies for use. It will further make the discovery of especially power/durable/unique items that much more awesome

im rambling, but basically im saying that so many open world games have situations where the player ends up looting and hoarding massive amounts of stuff simply to sell off to a merchant (or in more rare cases to craft). BotW is showing (so far) that really only rare minerals and gems will be able to be sold off/worth selling off. All else contributes to stuff you'll want/need to use in the short term. At this point I'm assuming that some type of restoration or enhancement mechanic is in the game, but hope that it's a fairly costly process/choice so as to not completely undermine durability as a mechanic. Also curious to see how the existence of stuff like the master sword will play in to the game's concept of durability.
 
No I don't praise all PS4 exclusives like you do every single Ubisoft game.
I don't praise every ubisoft game but dude, i've seen your twitter account, just recently you were trying to brag about "looking forward to playstation dominance" because for some reason you think Halo 5 and Gears undersold. It's absolutely very clear that you have an inherent bias towards anything playstation.

It's mechanic I'm not fond of no matter the game. That doesn't mean I won't play a game that has it. Games where you can repair damage like Bloodborne or The Witcher 3 are tolerable. Shit just breaking and being lost forever sucks.
It absolutely depends on the game. Considering this will be the hardest Zelda since the original based on the tutorial area, a durability system with breakable weapons will definitely lead to some tense moments while exploring and provide incentives to explore more to find more durable weapons. Let It Die is the most tense game i've played all year due to the constant switching of weapons while I search for blueprints to craft incredibly durable weapons and armor and I played DS3.
 
It absolutely depends on the game. Considering this will be the hardest Zelda since the original based on the tutorial area, a durability system with breakable weapons will definitely lead to some tense moments while exploring and provide incentives to explore more to find more durable weapons. Let It Die is the most tense game i've played all year due to the constant switching of weapons while I search for blueprints to craft incredibly durable weapons and armor and I played DS3.

I've not played Let it Die. Perhaps I should give it a try. This implementation of Durability sounds actually really cool. Not that many games have good durability implementation so despite the jank I've seen on Let it Die's combat, the implementation of durability seems to genuinely enable a sense of strategic tension going by your post.
 
I've not played Let it Die. Perhaps I should give it a try. This implementation of Durability sounds actually really cool. Not that many games have good durability implementation so despite the jank I've seen on Let it Die's combat, the implementation of durability seems to genuinely enable a sense of strategic tension going by your post.
Let It Die is straight up the most fluid feeling game that this studio's ever released.
 
Let It Die is straight up the most fluid feeling game that this studio's ever released.

Impressive. About time we had a nice game from grasshopper. I wouldn't mind if they go back and reuse lily bergamo for their next project, but it seems let it die has come out a great game. Can't wait to play it.
 
Can't believe this thread was actually a thing, never mind one that has kept going this long.

Two games whose only likeness is in being open world and... having bows I guess.

I don't praise every ubisoft game

Could've fooled me. I can't think of the last Ubi thread I looked at that didn't have you condescending to other posters in some fashion.

but dude, i've seen your twitter account, just recently you were trying to brag about "looking forward to playstation dominance" because for some reason you think Halo 5 and Gears undersold.

Compared to prior games in their respective series at launch, they did though.

It's absolutely very clear that you have an inherent bias towards anything playstation.

You're the last member of this forum to lecture anyone else on bias... especially after that embarassing Uncharted 4 photomode thread the mods had to lock because of you failing to keep your own seeming biases re: Playstation in check.
 
Get a room.
If you want to discuss sales can you do that with an actual framework of reference or something?
The mechanical discussion is actually interesting.
 
Can't believe this thread was actually a thing, never mind one that has kept going this long.

Two games whose only likeness is in being open world and... having bows I guess.
Both are open world action adventure RPGs with exploration as a big focus.

Could've fooled me. I can't think of the last Ubi thread I looked at that didn't have you condescending to other posters in some fashion.
Basic fact checking is called condescending now?

Compared to prior games in their respective series at launch, they did though.
343 like made a bigger profit off of halo 5 than both halo 3 and halo 4.

You're the last member of this forum to lecture anyone else on bias... especially after that embarassing Uncharted 4 photomode thread the mods had to lock because of you failing to keep your own seeming biases re: Playstation in check.
You completely missed the point of that thread as well as the context.
This is the only reasonable response to the implication that I have a bias against playstation because I don't think photomode BS is what we should use as evidence for graphical proficiency during nitty gritty technical discussion:
LBM55wY.gif

^
You see that, that's what it looks like when i'm being condescending.
 
WOW... these games will come out within 3 days of each other. The chatter will just increase. I find them both to be very interesting and I would have purchase a system to play either of these games. Will be a very intriguing 3 days.
 
Why

Are nintendo fans sooooo obsessed

with taking kind of cool looking games on Nintendo consoles

and overreaching far beyond the point of rational comparison


What could NINTENDO THEMSELVES even possibly gain by making such an obtuse comparison?

What are you even talking about dude
 
WOW... these games will come out within 3 days of each other. The chatter will just increase. I find them both to be very interesting and I would have purchase a system to play either of these games. Will be a very intriguing 3 days.

It's completely fantastic that we have potentially some amazing Action adventure games on the Horizon (Pun intended). Horizon might be more RPG stats than I'd like but so far it's very nice to see AAA action adventure go back to making such an interesting potential for gameplay again.

Why

Are nintendo fans sooooo obsessed

with taking kind of cool looking games on Nintendo consoles

and overreaching far beyond the point of rational comparison


What could NINTENDO THEMSELVES even possibly gain by making such an obtuse comparison?

You know if you actually have a substantial criticism to make to my post, I'd like that. I made the post because I wanted to seriously think about what things each game is doing and identify what they do well in contrast to one another. I'd prefer to be taken seriously thank you.
 
What are this week's lottery numbers? Zelda is going to be proper open word like games have been doing for years. Seriously their way to promote it on Jimmy Kimmel was "see that place you can go there." It looks really dated to be honest. Not saying it won't be good, but certainly doesn't look to be breaking any new ground.

No, but its Zelda. Whereas Horizon may just be another open world game in a sea of open world games.
 
Zelda could be completely garbage with a rehash of old ideas that has been done 5 years ago but it would still get 85 minimum metacritic and be remembered for years and years just because of the franchise name and ninty diehards.
 
Why

Are nintendo fans sooooo obsessed

with taking kind of cool looking games on Nintendo consoles

and overreaching far beyond the point of rational comparison


What could NINTENDO THEMSELVES even possibly gain by making such an obtuse comparison?

I will buy both day one so i could care less sure i am a huge zelda fan so i will like that game more probably but this is my most anticipated ps4 game right now. Those were Kingdom Hearts 3 and RDR 2 before so thats pretty good for a new ip because i love rdr and kh.

People should enjoy both games they are both gonna be superb.
 
Why

Are nintendo fans sooooo obsessed

with taking kind of cool looking games on Nintendo consoles

and overreaching far beyond the point of rational comparison



What could NINTENDO THEMSELVES even possibly gain by making such an obtuse comparison?

That Switch hype has people losing it.
 
Horizon looks amazing, but the fact that it's by a developer who hasn't made a great game scares me. Sure KZ2 was good, KZ4 was a decent launch title, but neither were great and neither had the scope of what Horizon is promising. I've preordered Zelda, will wait for Horizon.

I think the true test is Zelda vs Red Dead Redemption 2. Those titles will battle for GotY as long as RDR2 makes 2017. Both are open world, both are full of ponies. Both come from the best in the industry.
 
Not worried about weapon durability since everyone loved BotW at E3, hence why it won Game of the Show pretty much everywhere. However Nintendo did it, they did it right. Zelda looks like a blast to play.
 
I think the true test is Zelda vs Red Dead Redemption 2. Those titles will battle for GotY as long as RDR2 makes 2017. Both are open world, both are full of ponies. Both come from the best in the industry.

Once we get more details on RDR2, I might do a comparison to that game. Rockstar have a penchant for interesting gameplay mechanics and systems that create oddly believable settings (which is what RDR succeeded at perhaps the best of any of their games), but I find that they don't go far enough with their design in utilizing all these truly interesting mechanics. Plus they have a big issue with character controls because of Euphoria.

I hope that they go farther with Horse mechanics now that BoTW has caught up and perhaps even built on RDR.

Also I want more open ended missions.
 
As someone who has always vastly preferred 2D Zelda to 3D Zelda, I am absolutely sold on BoTW and not at all sold on Horizon.

Horizon has the potential to be fantastic, but it could also fall really flat gameplay wise. I'm going to wait and see.
 
WOW... these games will come out within 3 days of each other. The chatter will just increase. I find them both to be very interesting and I would have purchase a system to play either of these games. Will be a very intriguing 3 days.
Thanks for bumping this 1 month old, terrible, terrible thread.
 
Zelda could be completely garbage with a rehash of old ideas that has been done 5 years ago but it would still get 85 minimum metacritic and be remembered for years and years just because of the franchise name and ninty diehards.
That's incredibly unlikely considering the quality of the on hands demos.
 
LOL i love Souls but in all 3 you can just hold your shield up and parry nearly every enemy in the game.

But there's no button prompt telling you when to parry which is a pretty key difference. BoTW apes the Souls parry (though it's probably more like SS's shield bash) though so this isn't an issue anymore. I think Royal Guard is probably the best parry mechanic overall though.
 
Zelda could be completely garbage with a rehash of old ideas that has been done 5 years ago but it would still get 85 minimum metacritic and be remembered for years and years just because of the franchise name and ninty diehards.

I think this line of thinking needs to stop. People get hype for Zelda because when they see a Zelda game it's pretty much a guarantee that you are getting a good game.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom