Support NeoGAF

[Bernardougf]

Before anyone says it, I know the game has already sold ridiculous amounts which is why it no doubt launched on the Switch given the userbase.

But holy shit, this has to be the biggest generational difference i've ever come across on a game. I started it at launch on the Switch but gave up after 5 or so hours, the performance was awful, the game looked ugly and the loading times weren't great.

Now playing it on the Switch 2 it's literally an entirely new game. No, it doesn't look amazing visually but it looks far better and cleaner. Performance bar the odd occasion is a great, at 60fps it feels so much better to play it's not even comparable to the Switch 1 version. Then the loading times are now almost instant which is a game changer, no matter if you fast travel, enter a shrine, or die, getting back into the game doesn't bore you.

Honestly the most impressive Switch 2 game i've played so far. Mario Kart World is good but this is a game changer.

60 fps is a huge difference for any game... but its nothing new since the switch also had 60 fps games.

 

[Chiggs]

Breath of the Wild is a mediocre Zelda game; Tears of the Kingdom is a legitimately great one.

 

[BlackTron]

Why the fuck do you care if they reuse assets? Seriously why do you think that a game that reuses artwork is somehow bad? It still took them 6 years to release it. All the shrines were new. New caves, remixed world that felt like time had passed, new overworld, new underworld. There was so much more to it than the fact that it reused the map and assets.

I don't really care that they reuse assets, in fact I just made a post explaining why I don't care they reused the map.

But I would have cared it it were a Switch 2 launch game. It's a Switch 1 double-dip. It's not a next-gen game, and I don't want it positioned or marketed as one. If Gamecube launched with Majora's Mask instead of releasing it on 64, and that somehow made them feel they had released a "gamecube zelda" and had more time to make me wait for the next one, I'd be pissed. Because it is a Nintendo 64 game.

 

[Hugare]

Imagine loosing one of the biggest install bases ever for 60 FPS

Thankfuly, Nintendo isnt this stupid

But holy shit, this has to be the biggest generational difference i've ever come across on a game

Are you this impressed by higher resolution + 60 FPS bump?

OP, please

 

[BlackTron]

Are you this impressed by higher resolution + 60 FPS bump?

OP, please

Truth be told, it's just been boosted so it no longer runs like crap. It still looks like a last gen game.

I honestly don't think the boost should have been paid. For a fee I would have wanted more texture improvements. Sorry Nintendo. Of course I still think the game is quite technically impressive but this is just business room fleecing and little else like the Welcome Tour decision. Ten dollars X many people who will get it on a whim = money in the account that wouldn't have been there. Yeah I know they added the phone app as an excuse to charge us for the patch that doesn't even have much real work in it. Gee thanks lol

Playing TOTK on Switch 2 on a big 4k TV. The super high resolution sharpness just reveals all the flaws that make it a last gen game. Flipping between Mario Kart and TOTK make it especially jarring. TOTK uses BOTW as a template which was made for Wii U with 1GB of RAM. The only way to make that world look next-gen would be to redo it from scratch. Just make a new game.

 

[S0ULZB0URNE]

No, it was such a downgrade for a Zelda title.

It is maybe good for Minecraft players, but I really didn't enjot TotK as a Zelda game. BotW was much more enjoyable.

Happy the critics and sales disagree.

 

[proandrad]

It should have been dlc for BOTW.

 

[RoboFu]

nah TOTK was more of an expansion 2.0 than a real sequel. It was fun but it's more of the same than different. the first Zelda for switch 2 needs to be something more.

 

[AJUMP23]

Nintendo needed a tent pole that year and that game carried the system. I am glad it came out on Switch.

 

[Zannegan]

Nintendo fans buy a Switch 1 to play Zelda for hundreds of £ with performance and graphic fidelity being substandard. They then pay another £450-500 to then play the same game at what they deem to be acceptable levels with a paid upgrade if you don't pay for their "online service" and think they got a good deal and act like it's a fantastic achievement.

In terms of releasing it exclusively on Switch 2, Nintendo has been loving the double dip customers since the end of the Wii when Twilight Princess (think it was that 1) was released on both the Wii and the WiiU. Then the next Zelda on Wii U and Switch, and now both those Zeldas from Switch to Switch 2 with the difference being you can pay for the "enhanced" versions instead of the full game again.

Eh, you could make the same point about any remake/DE with an upgrade path on any platform. No one is rushing out to buy Switch 2 for upgraded Zelda any more than they were running out to buy a PS5 for the new and improved Horizon. It's a nice passive upgrade for many who were already buying Switch 2, not a conspiracy.